4 ms·
This seems like a bonkers thing to claim. You're suggesting that if someone gave you two burgers that tasted identical, one that was real meat and costs £5, and
by crimsoneer 4y ago
This seems like a bonkers thing to claim. You're suggesting that if someone gave you two burgers that tasted identical, one that was real meat and costs £5, and the other that was fake and costs £2, if they were other than that TOTALLY IDENTICAL (other than the fake one being better for the planet), you'd still feel the need to eat the real one? For some sense of perceived...offence?
- zmgsabst 4y agoNot that person, but… Yes, absolutely. The history of processed foods is that they’re really bad for us, compared to natural foods, even when ostensibly of similar nutrition. Why would I trust a process that has failed for decades to work this time?
- healsdata 4y ago100% Have we forgotten trans fats in margarine? By all accounts, it was butter but cheaper and "healthier". 70 years later, we realized it was worse for us that natural fats.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Panoramix 4y agoI would. I try to only eat fresh things that I could prepare at home. Why would I willingly eat 100 grams of refined coconut oil with yeast, potassium chloride, methylcellulose (a laxative) and a whole bunch of other stuff? I'd rather eat less meat than replace it with this crap.
- dzhiurgis 4y agoDepends how you market them. Tons of people opt for organic without having much clue what is means. It’s almost default in most shops. Tons are buying sunscreen that doesn’t even work all while thinking they are better than everyone else. Honestly making it cheaper is probably an error. Less cash for developer to improve it and has negative aspect of it.
- antifa 4y agoI wish I could get $5 fake meat that tasted real for $2. Right now the options are real $10, fake and substantially not as a good, $10 or $12.