11 ms·

I love all these whacky avenues people take when eating just plants is a very low foot print option available to almost everyone. We don’t need to eat crickets

I love all these whacky avenues people take when eating just plants is a very low foot print option available to almost everyone. We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. You just can’t make a start up on beans and rice. Which is a shame, because beans and rice are healthy and tasty. And also are one of the avenues to save the planet.

hammock 4y ago
Beans + rice is easily the most common meal on the planet, as the cheapest complete protein source around. We live in a bubble, never mind saving the planet
- sometimeshuman 4y ago
  A quick Google search reveals that beans are not a complete, since they lack several essential amino acids. Edit: correction, it appears that soybeans are the exception. But when one thinks of having a serving of "beans and rice", soybeans are unlikely to be the bean served.
  - forgetfulness 4y ago
    That's why it's the beans+rice combination that's complete, because they're complementary in composition. But the truth is that you don't need to eat them in the same meal, and most people don't have a shortage of grain in their diets if they aren't going out of their way to make it so. Porridge in the morning and lentils at lunch and you've done it.
  - bch 4y ago
    beans != beans + rice; See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33564109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33564109
    - sometimeshuman 4y ago
      My mistake, I had blindly dismissed rice since it is commonly known to be a nutrient poor food. But several sources confirm the parent post and your comment are correct*. It's also too often repeated that a vegetable based diets will be lacking essential amino acids which seems like a gross falsehood now if you can get there with two wildly available plants that make up a common low-cost meal. I am baffled by the disconnect. *I don't cite the source since I am unsure if there are caveats or if the claim is controversial.
      - stonemetal12 4y ago
        I think the disconnect is that for meat you don't have to think about it. When it comes to plants, suddenly you have to know something about what you are eating. There are plenty of plant diets that are viable, you just have to research a little bit. Everyone always mentions beans and rice, but Potatoes by themselves are a complete protein. Some of the essential amino acids aren't found in high quantities in potatoes, so you have to eat a lot of them if you go that route. They are missing some vitamins and minerals as well, so you have to add sweet potatoes if you don't want scurvy.
  - wrycoder 4y ago
    Pinto beans and rice are complete, for example. The amino acid deficiencies are complementary.
  - sannee 4y ago
    Surely you can just eat more beans until you get enough methionine to satisfy your protein synthesis needs. We are not (yet, in the western world) at the point of having to eat a starvation diet (where the amino acid profile is actually important, since you are trying to eat as little as possible).
- bch 4y ago
  > complete protein source On the “complete protein” concept, by a famous popularizer of plant-based protein-combining[0] —— There is no need to combine foods at individual meals. “In 1971 I stressed protein complementarity because I assumed that the only way to get enough protein ... was to create a protein as usable by the body as animal protein. In combating the myth that meat is the only way to get high-quality protein, I reinforced another myth. I gave the impression that in order to get enough protein without meat, considerable care was needed in choosing foods. Actually, it is much easier than I thought. With three important exceptions, there is little danger of protein deficiency in a plant food diet.” —- [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_for_a_Small_Planet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_for_a_Small_Planet Edit: adjust description of what Lappé was popularizer of
  - metadat 4y ago
    Why did you quit there, leaving the 3 exceptions as a cliffhanger!? > The exceptions are diets very heavily dependent on [1] fruit or on [2] some tubers, such as sweet potatoes or cassava, or on [3] junk food (refined flours, sugars, and fat). This part could be important for some folks. :)
    - bch 4y ago
      I wanted you to tune in next week for the thrilling conclusion? ;) Thx for the amendment.
  - goethes_kind 4y ago
    Animal protein still seems to be of higher quality. Even among rich vegans in first would countries, the children comparatively less developed compared to their peers. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X16300065 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X1... https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/113/6/1565/6178918?login=false https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/113/6/1565/6178918?log...
- eYrKEC2 4y ago
  Did you know that cows can up cycle agricultural waste into protein? Human's can't eat corn stalks, for instance.
  - fullstick 4y ago
    We could upcycle agricultural waste by returning it to the earth. Let it decompose and return nutrients to the soil.
    - wrycoder 4y ago
      We do that, after the cows are done with it.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
stevenkkim 4y ago
Also, can you imagine the positive impact on health and well-being? Also, my impression is that at least in the U.S. there isn't a shortage of farmable land. It's just that most of it is used to grow corn and soybeans, and most of the corn is being used to feed cattle and make ethanol. I think a lot more work needs to be done to show how tasty plant-based foods can be. Anecdote: growing up, I hated brussel sprouts b/c we ate them boiled; now I love them oven-roasted. Salads can be amazing if a bit of effort is put into them (more than just iceberg lettuce and dressing).
- marricks 4y ago
  I try not to post too many empty “I totally agree” comments but man, brussel sprouts are amazing. Who ever popularized boiling them is a damn fool. Pan friend then oven roasted, just amazing. Best thing in the world. Also you’re right on all points, but god, love me some sprouts.
- pfarrell 4y ago
  In addition to changing to roasting, and depending on how old you are, brussels sprouts may have literally been different when you were a kid [0]. Dutch biologists worked to alter the sprouts we eat and have changed the bitterness. That's why they've had such a renaissance. I never had them as a kid, but I distinctly remember my brother making them at Thanksgiving around 2010 and we were shocked at how much we enjoyed them and couldn't figure out why they had such a bad reputation in pop culture. 0: https://www.mentalfloss.com/posts/do-brussels-sprouts-taste-better-now-yes-here-s-why-01ghed9q8dr8 https://www.mentalfloss.com/posts/do-brussels-sprouts-taste-...
  - stevenkkim 4y ago
    Very cool article, thanks for sharing!
Avicebron 4y ago
Huge swathes of the human population doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example of delicious vegetarian food spanning a very very long time.
- rs999gti 4y ago
  > doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example Indian/Pakistani food may be vegetarian but it tastes good because of animal products like eggs, butter, cream, milk, and cheese. It's vegetarian but not vegan. Source: I grew up eating this type of food daily
  - rs999gti 4y ago
    Edit: before you jump on me, yes I know Indian food has spices. But the animal products are what add the richness and savoriness to the food
    - valarauko 4y ago
      Plenty of Indian foods are already vegan or can be made vegan with simple substitutions.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
goodpoint 4y ago
> We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. While this is true, algae has been a common, almost staple food for thousands of years in Asia. TFA, "start eating algae" only betrays its narrow perspective.
- marricks 4y ago
  Completely valid, I worried about that after I typed it but decided to leave it in to relate more to the article which opens on a wacky start up idea.
slothtrop 4y ago
Only relatively low footprint. You're underestimating the fossil fuel consumption needed in the form of ammonia (for fertilizer), farming equipment (smelting for steel, also requires coke from coal), transport, manufacturing, plastics (greenhouses, packaging), etc. This is all essential to feed the world, and there's nothing low footprint about it. Btw, compare the consumption needed for a tomato/100g vs chicken, and you'll be surprised. All of this is a moot point if demand were to stop growing, and that will only happen when population does. Another accelerant is that as more of the world is lifted out of poverty, demand increases. All of the increases in efficiency and swaps for green energy are outpaced by demand, and will continue to be. Btw, immigrants are not moving to the 1st world so they could consume less. They're going to eat meat, buy gadgets and single family homes. In fact govt policy is counting on it (that's what a GDP increase means, more consumption). Reduction in overall meat consumption helps, but you shouldn't bet on it to end, nor is it the most exacerbating source of emissions (plus, I hope, seaweed infused feed could trivialize methane emissions as it rolls out). The alternative to lower demand is a staggering transition away from fossil fuels (only like 15% of fossil fuel consumption is for electricity), but that will probably take awhile. Lowering immigration rates would marginally help (probably not as much as people think) but that would be unpopular anyway. It's simultaneously "just" to pad the numbers of those consuming like Westerners (literally what "a better life" describes), and a moral imperative for the same concerned class to pressure Westerners to avoid consuming arbitrary things, or in general. Regardless, increase in consumption will arrive in the rest of the world. I think expanding access to contraceptives worldwide is probably the greenest possible thing that can be done right now. That's not coming from a perspective of anti-natalism either. EDIT: use your words if you disagree, like adults. If you can't even elucidate how, you should question your premise.
forgetfulness 4y ago
It's like the phenomenon of businessmen and politicians preferring to dazzle the public with implausible gadgetbahn concepts, instead of opting for presently-existing trains, of the various types that actually exist. The concrete existence of train technology causes the ball to get pushed further than the the 3D render stage to the far less exciting endeavors of drafting up projects, gathering political support, securing funding, doing environmental impact studies, battling NIMBYs in court, and may end up undercutting the bottom line of auto manufacturers that could make campaign contributions, and won't line up the pockets of visionary consultants writing reports on how other solutions to car traffic and long commutes could be dreamed up. https://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/ https://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/
version_five 4y ago
It's not hard to understand. Meat tastes good and is satisfying to eat, and is the preferred centerpiece of many cultures' meals. So there is a market to find substitutes that will have the same appeal. Not that I think crickets or algae fill the niche, but at least people are trying something. Vegetarians saying "why doesn't everyone eat just plants, I do it" are ignoring culture and projecting their narrow view onto others
ravenstine 4y ago
> I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. No, we don't hear about it more because it's not healthful. If it were, the human digestive system would be like that of cattle, but it's not. You can feed everyone carby, fibrous meals, but that's not optimal and not even necessarily better for the environment. The reason algae is proposed as a way to feed people is that it's not dumping a bunch of carbs, fiber, and incomplete protein down everyone's gullets. Humans don't need to be consuming these things, and there's drawbacks to diets that aren't based on what our species developed to primarily consume over the last 4 or so million years. There's aspects of algae that are preventing it from being a serious food source across the world, but if those roadblocks can be overcome then it can be a game changer because of where it can be grown and what kinds of nutrients it's capable of producing. In the present, there's no good reason to believe that "everyone" needs to eat more plants and less meat. Meat is a part of the atmospheric carbon cycle, just as are crops. On the contrary to what you're suggesting, and putting aside the fact that fossil fuels are being used throughout livestock and agriculture, individuals can eat whatever they see fit for themselves.
- bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
  Lentils and rice are a complete protein. While they don't provide 100% of the nutrients you need, if you throw in a few green vegetables you'll be absolutely fine. Crops use something like 1% of the resources to grow that meat does. It's not just about where carbon is stored, but land and water usage and where carbon is produced (cows fart. a lot.). Overall plant-based diets are far superior for the planet than meat-based diets, and contrary to popular opinion they don't have to suck.
  - BlargMcLarg 4y ago
    There is token research that creatine supplements are especially beneficial for vegans, and creatine isn't the only thing mostly found in animal-based foods. Given nutritional sciences has a history of being a rollercoaster ride, maybe it isn't the best idea to make wild claims which don't mirror how the world behaves at large. Water and land usage is also A: grossly overstated (you can't grow anything except grass on most land) and B: cited as something against all meat when chickens, goats, ducks, geese and pigs use far less of both. At that point, substantiate or correct your statement to 'beef'.
ianai 4y ago
Being from the land of great red and green chile (spelled correctly), I love legumes/pulses! I’d mix them with rice more but potatoes and wheat (tortillas) go with my metabolism much better. I also love falafel though and find the texture close enough to a burger for my uses. Edit-nonetheless the mock up stuff is fun and fills needs. Love me some “benevolent bacon”.
Kiro 4y ago
There are lot of things we don't need to do. I hate lentils and beans but love whacky food as you call it. Taste is subjective.
wintermutestwin 4y ago
>because beans and rice are healthy I disagree. A high carb diet make me fat. A high protein diets does not. There is no vegan way for me to eat my daily protein target without eating far too many carbs along with it. (edit: I should have stated that there is no way beyond eating highly processed foods)
- subsuxbjes 4y ago
  There is you just don't care to learn and are stuck in your own ways. That's fine, but don't act like it's not possible because it is and it's not hard.
- ericmcer 4y ago
  I feel the opposite, as soon as I start supplementing with whey protein or adding meat I put on muscle and weight, but with mostly beans/rice/lentil diet I have consistent energy and stay light. I think the "protein" obsession we have currently (even my milk carton brags about protein content) might be dialed back in the near future. It came from the weight lifting community, and lifting weights is one of the least healthy and functional ways to stay in shape. Hopefully we view hiking and doing physical activities as being "in shape" soon versus going to a gym to do a bunch of isolated movements with weight.
  - wintermutestwin 4y ago
    In my 20-30s, I was a long distance cyclist which required a high carb diet and I had persistent belly fat. Now I primarily lift weights and eat a high protein diet and I have lost all the belly fat and as an added bonus, my posture is no longer perma-hunched.
    - ericmcer 4y ago
      Which version of you would have done better at something like... running around with your kids at the park? Or running a mile to catch a train? My main point is that defined abs and a giant chest and arms have little to do with health and performance, but the body-building culture has convinced us all that they do. It got ridiculous in the 90s when Arnold and Stallone were portrayed as heroes good at everything due to their big muscles, when the reality was that Arnold needed help wiping his own ass when he was at his biggest. But if your goal is attracting a mate or intimidating other males bench press and bicep curls are your path. I am also coming from a place as someone who hit 315 on bench in my mid 20s but felt like an old man.
coinbasetwwa 4y ago
Being vegetarian is extremely unhealthy, drives the obesity epidemic, and is far more likely to cause individuals to become depressed. Good luck getting heme iron, carnitine, carnosine, taurine, creatine, B12, Vit D, and DHA in a meat free diet.
- subsuxbjes 4y ago
  What? This is honestly so wrong you can't be taken in good faith.
reality_inspctr 4y ago
you eat so many bugs all the time, ground up in food. this dismissive old crank attitude is ignoring simple truth. also a lot of the world happily eats bugs as a delicacy. they’re not whacky, you’re being quick to frame something you don’t know much about as dismissible.
jlg23 4y ago
> I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. I consider food that can be mass-produced in those 71% of the world's surface that cannot grow lentils or rice quite sexy indeed.
dinosaurdynasty 4y ago
(micro)-algae can be a really good source of long-chain omega-3's (EPA/DHA), which are otherwise difficult to get in a plant-based diet. While beans and rice are pretty damn good (or what I tend to do, beans and potatoes) it definitely isn't complete nutritionally and there is pretty important stuff that's missing or there isn't enough of (EPA/DHA, Vitamin D, Vitamin B12, etc). Variety is also good just because of allergies and oversensitivites to certain foods and even just taste preference. Just about anything is better for the planet than meat!
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dr_dshiv 4y ago
I would totally imagine a beans and rice drive-through focused on getting healthy family dinner for lowest possible price. Call it “Bowls” and allow upsells on toppings.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
That's great if you live in a part of the world where you can grow lentils and rice. Even down south here at 57°N it's still more ecologically sound to eat meat and potatoes, because potatoes grow pretty well and tough heathery grasses and sedges grow pretty well, and we can't eat those but sheep can.

hammock 4y ago

Beans + rice is easily the most common meal on the planet, as the cheapest complete protein source around. We live in a bubble, never mind saving the planet

sometimeshuman 4y ago
A quick Google search reveals that beans are not a complete, since they lack several essential amino acids. Edit: correction, it appears that soybeans are the exception. But when one thinks of having a serving of "beans and rice", soybeans are unlikely to be the bean served.
- forgetfulness 4y ago
  That's why it's the beans+rice combination that's complete, because they're complementary in composition. But the truth is that you don't need to eat them in the same meal, and most people don't have a shortage of grain in their diets if they aren't going out of their way to make it so. Porridge in the morning and lentils at lunch and you've done it.
- bch 4y ago
  beans != beans + rice; See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33564109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33564109
  - sometimeshuman 4y ago
    My mistake, I had blindly dismissed rice since it is commonly known to be a nutrient poor food. But several sources confirm the parent post and your comment are correct*. It's also too often repeated that a vegetable based diets will be lacking essential amino acids which seems like a gross falsehood now if you can get there with two wildly available plants that make up a common low-cost meal. I am baffled by the disconnect. *I don't cite the source since I am unsure if there are caveats or if the claim is controversial.
    - stonemetal12 4y ago
      I think the disconnect is that for meat you don't have to think about it. When it comes to plants, suddenly you have to know something about what you are eating. There are plenty of plant diets that are viable, you just have to research a little bit. Everyone always mentions beans and rice, but Potatoes by themselves are a complete protein. Some of the essential amino acids aren't found in high quantities in potatoes, so you have to eat a lot of them if you go that route. They are missing some vitamins and minerals as well, so you have to add sweet potatoes if you don't want scurvy.
- wrycoder 4y ago
  Pinto beans and rice are complete, for example. The amino acid deficiencies are complementary.
- sannee 4y ago
  Surely you can just eat more beans until you get enough methionine to satisfy your protein synthesis needs. We are not (yet, in the western world) at the point of having to eat a starvation diet (where the amino acid profile is actually important, since you are trying to eat as little as possible).
bch 4y ago
> complete protein source On the “complete protein” concept, by a famous popularizer of plant-based protein-combining[0] —— There is no need to combine foods at individual meals. “In 1971 I stressed protein complementarity because I assumed that the only way to get enough protein ... was to create a protein as usable by the body as animal protein. In combating the myth that meat is the only way to get high-quality protein, I reinforced another myth. I gave the impression that in order to get enough protein without meat, considerable care was needed in choosing foods. Actually, it is much easier than I thought. With three important exceptions, there is little danger of protein deficiency in a plant food diet.” —- [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_for_a_Small_Planet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_for_a_Small_Planet Edit: adjust description of what Lappé was popularizer of
- metadat 4y ago
  Why did you quit there, leaving the 3 exceptions as a cliffhanger!? > The exceptions are diets very heavily dependent on [1] fruit or on [2] some tubers, such as sweet potatoes or cassava, or on [3] junk food (refined flours, sugars, and fat). This part could be important for some folks. :)
  - bch 4y ago
    I wanted you to tune in next week for the thrilling conclusion? ;) Thx for the amendment.
- goethes_kind 4y ago
  Animal protein still seems to be of higher quality. Even among rich vegans in first would countries, the children comparatively less developed compared to their peers. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X16300065 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X1... https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/113/6/1565/6178918?login=false https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/113/6/1565/6178918?log...
eYrKEC2 4y ago
Did you know that cows can up cycle agricultural waste into protein? Human's can't eat corn stalks, for instance.
- fullstick 4y ago
  We could upcycle agricultural waste by returning it to the earth. Let it decompose and return nutrients to the soil.
  - wrycoder 4y ago
    We do that, after the cows are done with it.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

stevenkkim 4y ago

Also, can you imagine the positive impact on health and well-being? Also, my impression is that at least in the U.S. there isn't a shortage of farmable land. It's just that most of it is used to grow corn and soybeans, and most of the corn is being used to feed cattle and make ethanol. I think a lot more work needs to be done to show how tasty plant-based foods can be. Anecdote: growing up, I hated brussel sprouts b/c we ate them boiled; now I love them oven-roasted. Salads can be amazing if a bit of effort is put into them (more than just iceberg lettuce and dressing).

marricks 4y ago
I try not to post too many empty “I totally agree” comments but man, brussel sprouts are amazing. Who ever popularized boiling them is a damn fool. Pan friend then oven roasted, just amazing. Best thing in the world. Also you’re right on all points, but god, love me some sprouts.
pfarrell 4y ago
In addition to changing to roasting, and depending on how old you are, brussels sprouts may have literally been different when you were a kid [0]. Dutch biologists worked to alter the sprouts we eat and have changed the bitterness. That's why they've had such a renaissance. I never had them as a kid, but I distinctly remember my brother making them at Thanksgiving around 2010 and we were shocked at how much we enjoyed them and couldn't figure out why they had such a bad reputation in pop culture. 0: https://www.mentalfloss.com/posts/do-brussels-sprouts-taste-better-now-yes-here-s-why-01ghed9q8dr8 https://www.mentalfloss.com/posts/do-brussels-sprouts-taste-...
- stevenkkim 4y ago
  Very cool article, thanks for sharing!

Avicebron 4y ago

Huge swathes of the human population doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example of delicious vegetarian food spanning a very very long time.

rs999gti 4y ago
> doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example Indian/Pakistani food may be vegetarian but it tastes good because of animal products like eggs, butter, cream, milk, and cheese. It's vegetarian but not vegan. Source: I grew up eating this type of food daily
- rs999gti 4y ago
  Edit: before you jump on me, yes I know Indian food has spices. But the animal products are what add the richness and savoriness to the food
  - valarauko 4y ago
    Plenty of Indian foods are already vegan or can be made vegan with simple substitutions.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

goodpoint 4y ago

> We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. While this is true, algae has been a common, almost staple food for thousands of years in Asia. TFA, "start eating algae" only betrays its narrow perspective.

marricks 4y ago
Completely valid, I worried about that after I typed it but decided to leave it in to relate more to the article which opens on a wacky start up idea.

slothtrop 4y ago

Only relatively low footprint. You're underestimating the fossil fuel consumption needed in the form of ammonia (for fertilizer), farming equipment (smelting for steel, also requires coke from coal), transport, manufacturing, plastics (greenhouses, packaging), etc. This is all essential to feed the world, and there's nothing low footprint about it. Btw, compare the consumption needed for a tomato/100g vs chicken, and you'll be surprised. All of this is a moot point if demand were to stop growing, and that will only happen when population does. Another accelerant is that as more of the world is lifted out of poverty, demand increases. All of the increases in efficiency and swaps for green energy are outpaced by demand, and will continue to be. Btw, immigrants are not moving to the 1st world so they could consume less. They're going to eat meat, buy gadgets and single family homes. In fact govt policy is counting on it (that's what a GDP increase means, more consumption). Reduction in overall meat consumption helps, but you shouldn't bet on it to end, nor is it the most exacerbating source of emissions (plus, I hope, seaweed infused feed could trivialize methane emissions as it rolls out). The alternative to lower demand is a staggering transition away from fossil fuels (only like 15% of fossil fuel consumption is for electricity), but that will probably take awhile. Lowering immigration rates would marginally help (probably not as much as people think) but that would be unpopular anyway. It's simultaneously "just" to pad the numbers of those consuming like Westerners (literally what "a better life" describes), and a moral imperative for the same concerned class to pressure Westerners to avoid consuming arbitrary things, or in general. Regardless, increase in consumption will arrive in the rest of the world. I think expanding access to contraceptives worldwide is probably the greenest possible thing that can be done right now. That's not coming from a perspective of anti-natalism either. EDIT: use your words if you disagree, like adults. If you can't even elucidate how, you should question your premise.

forgetfulness 4y ago

It's like the phenomenon of businessmen and politicians preferring to dazzle the public with implausible gadgetbahn concepts, instead of opting for presently-existing trains, of the various types that actually exist. The concrete existence of train technology causes the ball to get pushed further than the the 3D render stage to the far less exciting endeavors of drafting up projects, gathering political support, securing funding, doing environmental impact studies, battling NIMBYs in court, and may end up undercutting the bottom line of auto manufacturers that could make campaign contributions, and won't line up the pockets of visionary consultants writing reports on how other solutions to car traffic and long commutes could be dreamed up. https://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/ https://www.cat-bus.com/2017/12/gadgetbahn/

version_five 4y ago

It's not hard to understand. Meat tastes good and is satisfying to eat, and is the preferred centerpiece of many cultures' meals. So there is a market to find substitutes that will have the same appeal. Not that I think crickets or algae fill the niche, but at least people are trying something. Vegetarians saying "why doesn't everyone eat just plants, I do it" are ignoring culture and projecting their narrow view onto others

ravenstine 4y ago

> I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. No, we don't hear about it more because it's not healthful. If it were, the human digestive system would be like that of cattle, but it's not. You can feed everyone carby, fibrous meals, but that's not optimal and not even necessarily better for the environment. The reason algae is proposed as a way to feed people is that it's not dumping a bunch of carbs, fiber, and incomplete protein down everyone's gullets. Humans don't need to be consuming these things, and there's drawbacks to diets that aren't based on what our species developed to primarily consume over the last 4 or so million years. There's aspects of algae that are preventing it from being a serious food source across the world, but if those roadblocks can be overcome then it can be a game changer because of where it can be grown and what kinds of nutrients it's capable of producing. In the present, there's no good reason to believe that "everyone" needs to eat more plants and less meat. Meat is a part of the atmospheric carbon cycle, just as are crops. On the contrary to what you're suggesting, and putting aside the fact that fossil fuels are being used throughout livestock and agriculture, individuals can eat whatever they see fit for themselves.

bobbylarrybobby 4y ago
Lentils and rice are a complete protein. While they don't provide 100% of the nutrients you need, if you throw in a few green vegetables you'll be absolutely fine. Crops use something like 1% of the resources to grow that meat does. It's not just about where carbon is stored, but land and water usage and where carbon is produced (cows fart. a lot.). Overall plant-based diets are far superior for the planet than meat-based diets, and contrary to popular opinion they don't have to suck.
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  There is token research that creatine supplements are especially beneficial for vegans, and creatine isn't the only thing mostly found in animal-based foods. Given nutritional sciences has a history of being a rollercoaster ride, maybe it isn't the best idea to make wild claims which don't mirror how the world behaves at large. Water and land usage is also A: grossly overstated (you can't grow anything except grass on most land) and B: cited as something against all meat when chickens, goats, ducks, geese and pigs use far less of both. At that point, substantiate or correct your statement to 'beef'.

ianai 4y ago

Being from the land of great red and green chile (spelled correctly), I love legumes/pulses! I’d mix them with rice more but potatoes and wheat (tortillas) go with my metabolism much better. I also love falafel though and find the texture close enough to a burger for my uses. Edit-nonetheless the mock up stuff is fun and fills needs. Love me some “benevolent bacon”.

Kiro 4y ago

There are lot of things we don't need to do. I hate lentils and beans but love whacky food as you call it. Taste is subjective.

wintermutestwin 4y ago

>because beans and rice are healthy I disagree. A high carb diet make me fat. A high protein diets does not. There is no vegan way for me to eat my daily protein target without eating far too many carbs along with it. (edit: I should have stated that there is no way beyond eating highly processed foods)

subsuxbjes 4y ago
There is you just don't care to learn and are stuck in your own ways. That's fine, but don't act like it's not possible because it is and it's not hard.
ericmcer 4y ago
I feel the opposite, as soon as I start supplementing with whey protein or adding meat I put on muscle and weight, but with mostly beans/rice/lentil diet I have consistent energy and stay light. I think the "protein" obsession we have currently (even my milk carton brags about protein content) might be dialed back in the near future. It came from the weight lifting community, and lifting weights is one of the least healthy and functional ways to stay in shape. Hopefully we view hiking and doing physical activities as being "in shape" soon versus going to a gym to do a bunch of isolated movements with weight.
- wintermutestwin 4y ago
  In my 20-30s, I was a long distance cyclist which required a high carb diet and I had persistent belly fat. Now I primarily lift weights and eat a high protein diet and I have lost all the belly fat and as an added bonus, my posture is no longer perma-hunched.
  - ericmcer 4y ago
    Which version of you would have done better at something like... running around with your kids at the park? Or running a mile to catch a train? My main point is that defined abs and a giant chest and arms have little to do with health and performance, but the body-building culture has convinced us all that they do. It got ridiculous in the 90s when Arnold and Stallone were portrayed as heroes good at everything due to their big muscles, when the reality was that Arnold needed help wiping his own ass when he was at his biggest. But if your goal is attracting a mate or intimidating other males bench press and bicep curls are your path. I am also coming from a place as someone who hit 315 on bench in my mid 20s but felt like an old man.

coinbasetwwa 4y ago

Being vegetarian is extremely unhealthy, drives the obesity epidemic, and is far more likely to cause individuals to become depressed. Good luck getting heme iron, carnitine, carnosine, taurine, creatine, B12, Vit D, and DHA in a meat free diet.

subsuxbjes 4y ago
What? This is honestly so wrong you can't be taken in good faith.

reality_inspctr 4y ago

you eat so many bugs all the time, ground up in food. this dismissive old crank attitude is ignoring simple truth. also a lot of the world happily eats bugs as a delicacy. they’re not whacky, you’re being quick to frame something you don’t know much about as dismissible.

jlg23 4y ago

> I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. I consider food that can be mass-produced in those 71% of the world's surface that cannot grow lentils or rice quite sexy indeed.

dinosaurdynasty 4y ago

(micro)-algae can be a really good source of long-chain omega-3's (EPA/DHA), which are otherwise difficult to get in a plant-based diet. While beans and rice are pretty damn good (or what I tend to do, beans and potatoes) it definitely isn't complete nutritionally and there is pretty important stuff that's missing or there isn't enough of (EPA/DHA, Vitamin D, Vitamin B12, etc). Variety is also good just because of allergies and oversensitivites to certain foods and even just taste preference. Just about anything is better for the planet than meat!

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dr_dshiv 4y ago

I would totally imagine a beans and rice drive-through focused on getting healthy family dinner for lowest possible price. Call it “Bowls” and allow upsells on toppings.

Gordonjcp 4y ago

That's great if you live in a part of the world where you can grow lentils and rice. Even down south here at 57°N it's still more ecologically sound to eat meat and potatoes, because potatoes grow pretty well and tough heathery grasses and sedges grow pretty well, and we can't eat those but sheep can.