5 ms·
Author affiliations are as follows: > Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, MOE, Key Laboratory of Meat Processing, MARA, Jiangsu Innovative C
by wzdd 4y ago
Author affiliations are as follows:
> Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, MOE, Key Laboratory of
Meat Processing, MARA, Jiangsu Innovative Center of Meat Production, Processing
and Quality Control, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
I'm not saying the study is wrong. It's likely right! I just think it's going to be an interesting decade as meat producers apparently now recognise meat alternatives as an existential threat.
- verisimi 4y agoIt's a threat, because meat replacement is so heavily promoted, no doubt with government mandates coming. I'm personally a vegetarian, but I can't stand the government interference in food, I sympathise with meat eaters. I hear of farmers having to keep cows in sheds to protect orchids, and other nonsense. (As if it is a kindness to do this to cows, and feed them grains, etc.) Obviously this is a prelude to making meat a scarce product, cows being dangerous to the environment apparently, so people will be forced to eat artificial, human-designed, frankenfoods. I don't think we can even conceive of the diseases and behavioural issues that a non-natural diet will cause. They aren't going to be positive though :(
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y ago>Obviously this is a prelude to making meat a scarce product, cows being dangerous to the environment apparently, so people will be forced to eat artificial, human-designed, frankenfoods. Loads of cultures have good plant based foods and dishes. It’s only when I started living in a western country did I experience the bizarre need to make meat analogues. Just cook vegetables better.
- yreg 4y ago>I'm personally a vegetarian, but I can't stand the government interference in food Funny, because I'm a meat eater and I can't stand the government interference in making meat artificially cheap through subsidies when it is clearly the immoral and environment-hurting food option.
- alfor 4y agoBoth can be true at the same time.
- snapplebobapple 4y agoIt also costs us the much better solution of just making meat production better. There are multiple small projects that appear to be raising meat in a carbon net sequestering manner because doing stuff like intensive but brief with multiweek regrowth phases appears to dump a ton of carbon Into the soil, creating more high quality soil. They really need to be expanding those to the whole meat industry, not getting rid of meat. There is this synergistic spot in ag for meat production that likely increases plant yields while giving animals wonderful living conditions while sequestering carbon in a much less fire prone way than growing trees that we arent even really talking about right now.
- seneca 4y ago> Obviously this is a prelude to making meat a scarce product, cows being dangerous to the environment apparently, so people will be forced to eat artificial, human-designed, frankenfoods. It's already beginning. This is what the farmer protests (barely covered in the US) in the Netherlands are about. Their government is forcing thousands of cattle farms out of business.
- crayboff 4y ago> no doubt with government mandates coming > Obviously this is a prelude to making meat a scarce product, cows being dangerous to the environment apparently, so people will be forced to eat artificial, human-designed, frankenfoods I've seen this conspiracy mentioned before on the internet, can you give me a good source that led you to believe this? I can't imagine any reasonable world where there would be any real political will for a government to mandate the replacement of meat. I could imagine subsides similar to what the meat production industry already receives, but I can't imagine any mandates. I could also imagine the occasional far left politician call for that some level of reduction in meat production, but I don't believe the US government would ever have the will to force people to eat meat alternatives
- User23 4y ago> I can't imagine any reasonable world… What gives you the impression that we live in a reasonable world?
- Sapere_Aude 4y ago[dead]
- jamesrr39 4y ago> I hear of farmers having to keep cows in sheds to protect orchids Sounds more like the government intervention here is actually to protect wild flowers. The farmer in this story has then concluded it's easier/cheaper to do that by keeping the cows in the shed than to fence off the field. Going for a walk in the countryside near me, you know, in the real world, cows are often outside in fenced fields.
- User23 4y agoCows view fences as polite suggestions. That saying “the grass is greener on the other side of the fence” is based on direct observation.
- throw827474737 4y agoWait what Frankenfoods? At least current processed meat is usually more "Frankenfood" and comes with more unnatural additions then plant-based alternatives like e.g. Beyond Meat?
- BlargMcLarg 4y agoI can't speak for the US, but a few cuts of steak don't have the 10+ ingredient list a few meat alternatives have here. Alternatively, processed meats are just as much 'Frankenfoods'.
- ceejayoz 4y agoThe steaks have 10+ ingredients, they’re just a step removed. Plenty of plant protein, supplements, etc. in them. The cows just do the processing.
- User23 4y agoTraditionally processed meats like German sausages are hardly frankenfoods. That proverb about seeing how the sausage is made is true though.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- elif 4y agoThe fact that it found two independent results, that digestive response is diminished AND nutrient absorption was diminished, leads me to believe the study's design was to focus on alternative meat deficiencies rather than qualitatively compare the two. In fact, the way the summary reads to me, it seems like they may just be cleverly restating that real meat is harder to digest.