5 ms·

> Mason-D’Croz said, “with substantial disruptions observed across the food system, particularly in the beef-value chain, which could contract substantially by

> Mason-D’Croz said, “with substantial disruptions observed across the food system, particularly in the beef-value chain, which could contract substantially by as much as 45% under the 60%-replacement scenario – challenging the livelihoods of the more than 1.5 million people employed in these sectors.” There's no way 60% of beef consumption will be replaced by plant-burgers without some kind of coercion.

woodruffw 4y ago
60% seems like a lot, but it actually isn't: there are a lot of consumers (like myself) who would be more than happy to eat nothing but plant-based burgers, now that they're within spitting distance of meat in terms of taste and feel. I'm not a vegan or even a vegetarian, but the only times I really eat hamburger anymore are when I need a convenient meal while traveling and a plant-based alternative is not available. Steak and other "whole" cuts are harder, obviously. But 40-45% of beef consumed in the US is ground beef[1], so cutting that by even half would get us half way there. And that seems entirely possible, even conservative, without coercion based on current consumer trends. [1]: https://beef2live.com/story-ground-beef-united-states-128-104332 https://beef2live.com/story-ground-beef-united-states-128-10...
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > 60% seems like a lot, but it actually isn't: there are a lot of consumers (like myself) who would be more than happy to eat nothing but plant-based burgers, now that they're within spitting distance of meat in terms of taste and feel. Quantify "a lot." > I'm not a vegan or even a vegetarian... Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation.
  - cromka 4y ago
    > Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation. Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation?
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation? No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. It might be an ideology like "I care a lot about climate change," but I think it's unusual for people to make food choices ideologically like that; especially independently, outside of something like a religious group. I think that puts a limit on the adoption of these substitutes. The vegetarians, vegans, and some other ideologicals will quickly jump on board. After that it will get a lot harder to sell these things.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        > No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. Where I am, they're roughly the same price as real meat, easier to keep frozen, and I don't appreciably notice the difference (they're definitely not meat, but they're much better than the previous generation of meat alternatives). Separately, a lot of my friends are vegetarian or vegan, which makes them convenient when I'm having company. But I'm perfectly content with them myself, as someone who loves animal products otherwise.
      - garblegarble 4y ago
        >> Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation? >No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. I'm not the person you're replying to but I don't see how that follows - wouldn't you try something new on a menu and then keep ordering it if you liked it? To refuse to try something because it doesn't contain meat seems, to use your words, ideologically motivated. Also let's get real here - we're talking about burger patties, the majority of which will be served by fast food joints like Burger King and McDonalds. Thin, made out of flavourless meat and cooked until they're choking hazard dry.
        malfist 4y ago
        Idealogical motivation is such a deceptive phrase. We all have motivations. Motivations form a framework that we make decisions from. We like tastes, textures, new experiences (or not), etc, depending on who we are as a person. Calling eating a plant meat "idealogical" like it's a bad thing is just pure deceptive rhetoric.
  - BudaDude 4y ago
    I'm sure most people would happily eat a McVeggie patty if it was cheaper than beef and tasted the same.
    - nsxwolf 4y ago
      I wouldn't make that assumption. I wouldn't order that. I would always pay more for the beef. I'm just not going to eat that other stuff.
      - Spivak 4y ago
        And that's fine, the point isn't to make everyone go meatless. People with strong preferences are always going to exist. The point is to reduce meat consumption overall in absolute terms.
        nsxwolf 4y ago
        I just wonder if the market for meat substitutes is already about as big as it ever will be without an ecological disaster or government coercion to increase demand.
        thinkcontext 4y ago
        Probably not. Beyond and Impossible are considerably better than previous products and there are still many people that aren't aware of that. They are still scaling up because of high demand. As they open bigger factories they'll get cheaper than meat which will drive even more demand.
        linuxftw 4y ago
        I think we should work against this point. Eating meat is a fundamental part of the human experience. We're losing our agricultural genomes that can never be replaced. We need to encourage people to eat a broader variety of meats from smaller producers, not eliminate meat consumption.
      - BudaDude 4y ago
  - UnpossibleJim 4y ago
    >>Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation.<< I'm not a conservative on most issues, but youthful (18-39) conservatives might be more ecologically bent than you would expect, so I'm not sure which ideology you were referring to. The "let it all burn" and "toss it into the ocean" attitude is a dinosaur and people are (finally) seeing the writing on the wall. The Boomers are retiring and starting to die off. Gen X and the generations after are starting to make decisions, and they've always been more ecologically sound on both sides of the isle. https://www.yccdaction.org/ https://www.yccdaction.org/ https://www.climatesolution.eco/the-american-climate-contract https://www.climatesolution.eco/the-american-climate-contrac... https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916238283/light-years-ahead-of-their-elders-young-republicans-push-gop-on-climate-change https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916238283/light-years-ahead-o... EDIT: formatting
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > ...so I'm not sure which ideology you were referring to. Any ideology that's mainly about something other than food (e.g. choosing a vegan diet out of concern for animal welfare). You're not going to get anywhere close to 60% adoption of fake-meat without coercion or some unrealistic level of popular ideological commitment.
      - UnpossibleJim 4y ago
        OK, the animal welfare angle makes more sense to me than the environmental concern. I apologize if I spoke out of turn if I misunderstood. So many people are bringing politics into conversations, which it turns out I may have done, inadvertently =) Though, honestly, I think they have a better chance at moving the needle with alternative meets like rabbits or even grasshoppers (eventually). Those veggie burgers are pretty bad for you, nutritionally.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    You have to remember that you don't actually have to have 60% of people quit meat cold turkey to reach that number, you just have to get ~6/10 meals averaged over everyone meals that would have had meat to not be either by switching to something naturally meatless or using a subsitute. You can drastically reduce meat consumption across a population without anyone being vegetarian or vegan. > ideological motivation Maybe it's possible you don't literally mean "ideology" but the reasons people choose to consume less meat are typically epistemic: * Because it reduces their carbon footprint and is better for the environment. * Because, for them, cutting out meat improves their health. Usually related to cholesterol, blood pressure, heart disease, fiber, and sometimes osteoporosis. * Because veggies and meat substitutes take longer to spoil. * Because veggies and grains are less expensive. * Because cutting out meat is associated with long term successful weight loss. The only ideological reason to switch is animal suffering.
    - shard 4y ago
      There are other ideological reasons, such as inefficiencies of meat production through grain, water shortage issues, meat factory working conditions, boycotting the importing of low quality foreign meat, possibly others.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    I don't know what you want quantified, since it's not a quantitative claim: it's a perceptual claim about how 60% of anything seems like a big number when it can actually be explained by relatively small changes in consumer behavior. > Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation. No, not really. I like animal products a lot. I think the closest ideological interest I have here is broad environmentalism. My understanding is that that's a common interest, to say the least, and that I am not particularly stringent or earnest when it comes to it (at least in terms of my individual choices).
- wollsmoth 4y ago
  Sure, but don't forget you can't have steak and other "whole" cuts without also creating an entire cow. There's always going to be random bits of it that are best suited to be hamburger. We can't really just stop eating hamburger and keep eating steak. I do think that if McDonalds ends up selling a beef alternative burger at or below the cost of hamburger it'll be a huge shift. Their beef isn't great to begin with so the fake stuff might even be an improvement.
  - garblegarble 4y ago
    >Their beef isn't great to begin with so the fake stuff might even be an improvement. It's a big improvement (the UK recipe anyway). I love beef but get the McPlant any time I get a McDonalds burger, it's a lot nicer than their beef patties. I wish it came with the option for real cheese, although the vegan cheese they serve it with isn't bad. They just need to lower the price.
  - daveoc64 4y ago
    The McPlant sold in the UK is fantastic: https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/vegan-mcplant.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/vegan-mcplant.htm... It uses a Beyond Meat patty, and a bespoke non-dairy cheese slice. Unlike the trial in the US, this product is available in every UK store and is 100% Vegan. The UK has long had a significant Vegetarian market, and the Vegan market has grown significantly. This isn't even the first Vegan product McDonald's UK has introduced.
    - wollsmoth 4y ago
      Can't wait for it to hit the US.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > Can't wait for it to hit the US. The McPlant has already been discontinued: https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-drops-beyond-meat-based-burgers-after-test-run https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-dr... (link credit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32387526 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32387526)
- ajross 4y ago
  > Steak and other "whole" cuts are harder, obviously. But 40-45% of beef consumed in the US is ground beef[1], so cutting that by even half would get us half way there. Frustratingly it wouldn't, because the ground beef being consumed is largely an afterproduct of cows raised for those larger cuts. Burgers are cheap not because beef is cheap (it's not) but because they're being subsidized by brisket roasts and tenderloins cut from the same animal (there's surely some dairy cows in the mix too, but I'm led to believe that most older dairy animals get slaughtered for non-grocery products like animal feed). We need to reduce steak/bbq consumption primarily, doing so will make burgers more expensive and reduce their consumption as a side effect.
pitaj 4y ago
If it's cheaper, I could see fast food really adopting it.
mc32 4y ago
It seems you’re right. A few ‘burger chains were trialing meat substitute ‘burgers and have ended the partnerships. It remains to be seen if this is due to lackluster demand or they’re now developing their own plant proteins with the information they have.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  Which ones ended their partnerships? Burger King is expanding theirs, at least as of a month or so ago[1]. I'm not saying it isn't happening, but I'm skeptical of a macro trend away from meat substitutes here. Anecdotally, I've seen meat substitutes show up in more places around me (like Mexican-style fast food). [1]: https://www.foodandwine.com/news/burger-king-new-impossible-king-southwest-bacon-whopper https://www.foodandwine.com/news/burger-king-new-impossible-...
  - mc32 4y ago
    Here is one trail that ended: https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-drops-beyond-meat-based-burgers-after-test-run https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-dr... In addition to McD's, PandExpress and TacoBell discontinued trial menu items.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Panda Express and Taco Bell might be different, but that article makes it sound like the trial concluded as planned: > At the pilot’s onset, McDonald’s indicated the McPlant would be available as part of the pilot for a limited time while supplies last. The company confirmed to Food & Beverage Insider in August the test run concluded as planned. In other words: they ran a trial, and it finished. That itself isn't evidence for either success or failure, any more than taking a scheduled blood test is/isn't evidence for a blood disease.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > In other words: they ran a trial, and it finished. That itself isn't evidence for either success or failure, any more than taking a scheduled blood test is/isn't evidence for a blood disease. There might be some ambiguity, but the evidence needle is definitely more on the "failure" side. This isn't like a routine blood test. They were test marketing a product. If the test succeeded, it would be foolish of them to not roll it out widely and make more money off of its now-measured success. It's very likely the product didn't meet their expectations, but it's hard to say by how much.
linuxftw 4y ago
Agreed. I personally will never eat the stuff unless I'm imprisoned.

woodruffw 4y ago

60% seems like a lot, but it actually isn't: there are a lot of consumers (like myself) who would be more than happy to eat nothing but plant-based burgers, now that they're within spitting distance of meat in terms of taste and feel. I'm not a vegan or even a vegetarian, but the only times I really eat hamburger anymore are when I need a convenient meal while traveling and a plant-based alternative is not available. Steak and other "whole" cuts are harder, obviously. But 40-45% of beef consumed in the US is ground beef[1], so cutting that by even half would get us half way there. And that seems entirely possible, even conservative, without coercion based on current consumer trends. [1]: https://beef2live.com/story-ground-beef-united-states-128-104332 https://beef2live.com/story-ground-beef-united-states-128-10...

tablespoon 4y ago
> 60% seems like a lot, but it actually isn't: there are a lot of consumers (like myself) who would be more than happy to eat nothing but plant-based burgers, now that they're within spitting distance of meat in terms of taste and feel. Quantify "a lot." > I'm not a vegan or even a vegetarian... Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation.
- cromka 4y ago
  > Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation. Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation?
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation? No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. It might be an ideology like "I care a lot about climate change," but I think it's unusual for people to make food choices ideologically like that; especially independently, outside of something like a religious group. I think that puts a limit on the adoption of these substitutes. The vegetarians, vegans, and some other ideologicals will quickly jump on board. After that it will get a lot harder to sell these things.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      > No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. Where I am, they're roughly the same price as real meat, easier to keep frozen, and I don't appreciably notice the difference (they're definitely not meat, but they're much better than the previous generation of meat alternatives). Separately, a lot of my friends are vegetarian or vegan, which makes them convenient when I'm having company. But I'm perfectly content with them myself, as someone who loves animal products otherwise.
    - garblegarble 4y ago
      >> Not eating a burger frequently implies an idealogical motivation? >No, but seeking out one of these plant-burgers over real meat probably does. I'm not the person you're replying to but I don't see how that follows - wouldn't you try something new on a menu and then keep ordering it if you liked it? To refuse to try something because it doesn't contain meat seems, to use your words, ideologically motivated. Also let's get real here - we're talking about burger patties, the majority of which will be served by fast food joints like Burger King and McDonalds. Thin, made out of flavourless meat and cooked until they're choking hazard dry.
      - malfist 4y ago
        Idealogical motivation is such a deceptive phrase. We all have motivations. Motivations form a framework that we make decisions from. We like tastes, textures, new experiences (or not), etc, depending on who we are as a person. Calling eating a plant meat "idealogical" like it's a bad thing is just pure deceptive rhetoric.
- BudaDude 4y ago
  I'm sure most people would happily eat a McVeggie patty if it was cheaper than beef and tasted the same.
  - nsxwolf 4y ago
    I wouldn't make that assumption. I wouldn't order that. I would always pay more for the beef. I'm just not going to eat that other stuff.
    - Spivak 4y ago
      And that's fine, the point isn't to make everyone go meatless. People with strong preferences are always going to exist. The point is to reduce meat consumption overall in absolute terms.
      - nsxwolf 4y ago
        I just wonder if the market for meat substitutes is already about as big as it ever will be without an ecological disaster or government coercion to increase demand.
        thinkcontext 4y ago
        Probably not. Beyond and Impossible are considerably better than previous products and there are still many people that aren't aware of that. They are still scaling up because of high demand. As they open bigger factories they'll get cheaper than meat which will drive even more demand.
      - linuxftw 4y ago
        I think we should work against this point. Eating meat is a fundamental part of the human experience. We're losing our agricultural genomes that can never be replaced. We need to encourage people to eat a broader variety of meats from smaller producers, not eliminate meat consumption.
    - BudaDude 4y ago
- UnpossibleJim 4y ago
  >>Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation.<< I'm not a conservative on most issues, but youthful (18-39) conservatives might be more ecologically bent than you would expect, so I'm not sure which ideology you were referring to. The "let it all burn" and "toss it into the ocean" attitude is a dinosaur and people are (finally) seeing the writing on the wall. The Boomers are retiring and starting to die off. Gen X and the generations after are starting to make decisions, and they've always been more ecologically sound on both sides of the isle. https://www.yccdaction.org/ https://www.yccdaction.org/ https://www.climatesolution.eco/the-american-climate-contract https://www.climatesolution.eco/the-american-climate-contrac... https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916238283/light-years-ahead-of-their-elders-young-republicans-push-gop-on-climate-change https://www.npr.org/2020/09/25/916238283/light-years-ahead-o... EDIT: formatting
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > ...so I'm not sure which ideology you were referring to. Any ideology that's mainly about something other than food (e.g. choosing a vegan diet out of concern for animal welfare). You're not going to get anywhere close to 60% adoption of fake-meat without coercion or some unrealistic level of popular ideological commitment.
    - UnpossibleJim 4y ago
      OK, the animal welfare angle makes more sense to me than the environmental concern. I apologize if I spoke out of turn if I misunderstood. So many people are bringing politics into conversations, which it turns out I may have done, inadvertently =) Though, honestly, I think they have a better chance at moving the needle with alternative meets like rabbits or even grasshoppers (eventually). Those veggie burgers are pretty bad for you, nutritionally.
- Spivak 4y ago
  You have to remember that you don't actually have to have 60% of people quit meat cold turkey to reach that number, you just have to get ~6/10 meals averaged over everyone meals that would have had meat to not be either by switching to something naturally meatless or using a subsitute. You can drastically reduce meat consumption across a population without anyone being vegetarian or vegan. > ideological motivation Maybe it's possible you don't literally mean "ideology" but the reasons people choose to consume less meat are typically epistemic: * Because it reduces their carbon footprint and is better for the environment. * Because, for them, cutting out meat improves their health. Usually related to cholesterol, blood pressure, heart disease, fiber, and sometimes osteoporosis. * Because veggies and meat substitutes take longer to spoil. * Because veggies and grains are less expensive. * Because cutting out meat is associated with long term successful weight loss. The only ideological reason to switch is animal suffering.
  - shard 4y ago
    There are other ideological reasons, such as inefficiencies of meat production through grain, water shortage issues, meat factory working conditions, boycotting the importing of low quality foreign meat, possibly others.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  I don't know what you want quantified, since it's not a quantitative claim: it's a perceptual claim about how 60% of anything seems like a big number when it can actually be explained by relatively small changes in consumer behavior. > Maybe so, but your food choices seem to be similarly driven by some kind ideological motivation. No, not really. I like animal products a lot. I think the closest ideological interest I have here is broad environmentalism. My understanding is that that's a common interest, to say the least, and that I am not particularly stringent or earnest when it comes to it (at least in terms of my individual choices).
wollsmoth 4y ago
Sure, but don't forget you can't have steak and other "whole" cuts without also creating an entire cow. There's always going to be random bits of it that are best suited to be hamburger. We can't really just stop eating hamburger and keep eating steak. I do think that if McDonalds ends up selling a beef alternative burger at or below the cost of hamburger it'll be a huge shift. Their beef isn't great to begin with so the fake stuff might even be an improvement.
- garblegarble 4y ago
  >Their beef isn't great to begin with so the fake stuff might even be an improvement. It's a big improvement (the UK recipe anyway). I love beef but get the McPlant any time I get a McDonalds burger, it's a lot nicer than their beef patties. I wish it came with the option for real cheese, although the vegan cheese they serve it with isn't bad. They just need to lower the price.
- daveoc64 4y ago
  The McPlant sold in the UK is fantastic: https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/vegan-mcplant.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/vegan-mcplant.htm... It uses a Beyond Meat patty, and a bespoke non-dairy cheese slice. Unlike the trial in the US, this product is available in every UK store and is 100% Vegan. The UK has long had a significant Vegetarian market, and the Vegan market has grown significantly. This isn't even the first Vegan product McDonald's UK has introduced.
  - wollsmoth 4y ago
    Can't wait for it to hit the US.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > Can't wait for it to hit the US. The McPlant has already been discontinued: https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-drops-beyond-meat-based-burgers-after-test-run https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-dr... (link credit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32387526 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32387526)
ajross 4y ago
> Steak and other "whole" cuts are harder, obviously. But 40-45% of beef consumed in the US is ground beef[1], so cutting that by even half would get us half way there. Frustratingly it wouldn't, because the ground beef being consumed is largely an afterproduct of cows raised for those larger cuts. Burgers are cheap not because beef is cheap (it's not) but because they're being subsidized by brisket roasts and tenderloins cut from the same animal (there's surely some dairy cows in the mix too, but I'm led to believe that most older dairy animals get slaughtered for non-grocery products like animal feed). We need to reduce steak/bbq consumption primarily, doing so will make burgers more expensive and reduce their consumption as a side effect.

pitaj 4y ago

If it's cheaper, I could see fast food really adopting it.

mc32 4y ago

It seems you’re right. A few ‘burger chains were trialing meat substitute ‘burgers and have ended the partnerships. It remains to be seen if this is due to lackluster demand or they’re now developing their own plant proteins with the information they have.

woodruffw 4y ago
Which ones ended their partnerships? Burger King is expanding theirs, at least as of a month or so ago[1]. I'm not saying it isn't happening, but I'm skeptical of a macro trend away from meat substitutes here. Anecdotally, I've seen meat substitutes show up in more places around me (like Mexican-style fast food). [1]: https://www.foodandwine.com/news/burger-king-new-impossible-king-southwest-bacon-whopper https://www.foodandwine.com/news/burger-king-new-impossible-...
- mc32 4y ago
  Here is one trail that ended: https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-drops-beyond-meat-based-burgers-after-test-run https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/formulation/mcdonalds-dr... In addition to McD's, PandExpress and TacoBell discontinued trial menu items.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Panda Express and Taco Bell might be different, but that article makes it sound like the trial concluded as planned: > At the pilot’s onset, McDonald’s indicated the McPlant would be available as part of the pilot for a limited time while supplies last. The company confirmed to Food & Beverage Insider in August the test run concluded as planned. In other words: they ran a trial, and it finished. That itself isn't evidence for either success or failure, any more than taking a scheduled blood test is/isn't evidence for a blood disease.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > In other words: they ran a trial, and it finished. That itself isn't evidence for either success or failure, any more than taking a scheduled blood test is/isn't evidence for a blood disease. There might be some ambiguity, but the evidence needle is definitely more on the "failure" side. This isn't like a routine blood test. They were test marketing a product. If the test succeeded, it would be foolish of them to not roll it out widely and make more money off of its now-measured success. It's very likely the product didn't meet their expectations, but it's hard to say by how much.

linuxftw 4y ago

Agreed. I personally will never eat the stuff unless I'm imprisoned.