Would You Become a Vegetarian if/When Alternative "Meat" Products Taste (and Cost) Close Enough to The Real Thing?

Faro on 18/03/2020 - 22:28

With the recent conversation that broke out on a Quorn post, it got me wondering what people think about the whole movement towards meat replacements or alternatives that have been taking the culinary world by storm in recent years.

There's a good episode of Explained on Netflix that goes into more depth on the topic, but a few key things that come from it:

Humans may have reached the stage of evolution we are at today as a result of eating meat and its subsequent acceleration of our brain development.

We have evolved to be omnivorous as a result.

We have not always consumed as much meat as regularly as we do in the modern age.

Overconsumption of red and processed meats has been linked to some cancers.

We react positively to eating meat in a way that doesn't happen when we eat anything else due to a certain protein that can only be found in meat (a possible reason most people don't instantly enjoy alternative meats).

There are obviously many more reasons and arguments for both sides of the debate, but I thought I'd put this poll out there and leave it open for discussion in the comments (please try to be civil and not attack the low hanging fruit).

Poll Options

  • 40
    Yes. I would switch to alternative meats if the cost and flavour was close enough to the real thing
  • 50
    No. I only wish to consume real meat.
Food & Grocery

Comments

  • brendanm on 18/03/2020 - 22:54
    +11

    "Meat alternatives" are dumb. If you want to be vegetarian/vegan, just eat things that go with that diet. You can make amazing vegetarian/vegan dishes, mushing soy in with a tonne of salt and weird flavour additives is not good for you, and silly.

    • Faro on 18/03/2020 - 23:26
      -4

      So, in theory humans should be able to advance technology enough to produce (through lab work and studies) a compound similar enough or near-identical to actual meat without the slaughter. Yes, that's the extreme end of it, but it's already been done (only, it cost several thousand dollars to produce the equivalent of one burger).

      As science strides further into the territory of meat substitutes and edging closer to the taste and sensation that makes meat so appealing, theoretically we should get a product that is more-or-less meat without being a byproduct of death.

      If we reach this point would you object to the idea still?

      • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 07:34
        +5

        Try to read my comment again.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:00

          I did and don't see how my comment is somehow irrelevant considering I didn't make mention of anything made or soy, salt or flavour additives.

      • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:03
        +1

        Your idea is effectively lab grown meat. Which is still meat, even without the slaughter.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:20

          You're right. It takes away the slaughter and also drastically reduces the amount of emissions that come with farming cattle.

          It may still have the same detrimental effect on health, but that can still be moderated and potentially eliminated considering it is lab made? But who knows. We're not there yet. All of this is very much hypothetical and open for discussion.

      • Cave Fire on 19/03/2020 - 14:56
        +1

        brendanm was saying that instead of replicating meat, just enjoy plant food for what it is. There are some vegan youtubers I have seen that don't like meat replacement and find eating it traumatizing. Especially since some products are designed to bleed out haem when you eat them. There is also a lot of extra resources that need to go into producing these alternatives.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 15:08

          I understand that, but it still doesn't make meat substitutes dumb. I've gone into further detail on the ideologies in other comments here.

    • slow on 19/03/2020 - 08:32
      +1

      I don't get this argument. No=one is denying that meat tastes great.

      SO if you can get the same taste without killing animals then why wouldn't you??

      • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 09:59

        Thank you for understanding the purpose of this post. I had a feeling this comment section may stray into more aggressive and defensive waters (negs everywhere already suggest this), but I also want to hear the people out who hold such strong views and why they may be unwilling to loosen them.

      • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 14:33
        +3

        You can't get the same taste. Vegetarian things can taste great as well. Eating a crappy tasting plant based thing laden with sodium is silly, when you could just actually eat plant based food.

        • slow on 19/03/2020 - 16:00
          +1

          Maybe not, but wouldn't it be great if you could, and maybe soon you will be able to.

          I eat meat because I do like it, but I also often don't eat meat. I'm probably too lazy to go full vegetarian, but in theory would like to.

          What just annoys me is militant meat eaters who are anti anything vegetarian, or suggest that vegetarians are betraying themselves by trying to make things taste like meat.

          It's about the animals!

          • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 16:57

            @slow: I dislike both militant vegans and militant meat eaters.

  • fantombloo on 18/03/2020 - 23:11
    -1

    Humans may have reached the stage of evolution we are at today as a result of eating meat and its subsequent acceleration of our brain development.

    Without slavery we wouldn't have the pyramids. Maybe.

    Without the world wars we wouldn't have radar. Maybe.

    Without killing indigenous people in Australia we wouldn't have great access to Hamilton Island. Maybe.

    What was done in the past, even if it brought us benefit, is not necessarily a good reason to continue it going forward. Eating other animals is no longer necessary for anyone reading this forum; it is purely a matter of choice. Modern science guarantees that.

    Some choose to kill animals to suit their taste buds or habits / customs, I would say the "more evolved" see the unnecessary violence there and no longer do that.

    • Faro on 18/03/2020 - 23:23
      +1

      So would you say that all people should adapt and stop eating meat?

      And would you say the main reason would be human empathy? Anthropomorphism? Anti-capitalistic (based on our mass production for profit)? The justification for a plant-based diet as supplements provide the rest?

      Let's continue the discussion

      What makes people who abstain from meat "more evolved"?

      • Cave Fire on 19/03/2020 - 00:08
        +1

        Yeah, your experience will vary… but basically when I was long term vegetarian, I had way less stress about things. The biochemical explanation is that cortisol + other hormones are generated from precursors in meat. My overall health was better, but you are more fragile overall. There's quite a few other things that happened, but I guess these are only for people who stick with it for a long time. It also definitely makes you question your lifestyle and government information.

      • fantombloo on 19/03/2020 - 00:28
        -1

        I only use the word "evolved" in contraposition to the OP. I'm not here for word games. If someone can't see the difference between wantonly killing 60 billion warm blooded and trillions of aquatic and cold blooded animals every year just for the sake of our taste buds and traditions, and not wanting to do that, especially when all good science indicates it is totally unnecessary, then there is really not much more that I can tell them. Perhaps YouTube search "Earthlings" or *Dominion" or "What happens to day old male chicks in the egg industry" to provoke your own thoughts on the matter.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:03
          +1

          These arguments seem to be based on the empathetic or anthropomorphic side of the debate, however I'd like to read the good science articles you reference

          • fantombloo on 19/03/2020 - 08:32
            +2

            @Faro: These arguments are quite simple and can be understood by kindergarten children; there is no need for any sophistry.

            As for the efficacy of meeting our nutritional needs without animal products (their flesh and / or secretions), you can start with these articles by well known (and mostly quite conservative) dietetic / nutrition organisations:

            Harvard Medical School

            http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/becoming-a-veg…

                Traditionally, research into vegetarianism (see context) focused mainly on potential nutritional deficiencies, but in recent years, the pendulum has swung the other way, and studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.

            British Dietetic Association

            https://www.bda.uk.com/foodfacts/vegetarianfoodfacts.pdf

                Well planned vegetarian diets (see context) can be nutritious and healthy. They are associated with lower risks of heart disease, high blood pressure, Type 2 diabetes, obesity, certain cancers and lower cholesterol levels. This could be because such diets are lower in saturated fat, contain fewer calories and more fiber and phytonutrients/phytochemicals (these can have protective properties) than non-vegetarian diets. (…) Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of life** and have many benefits.

            Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27886704/

                It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes.

            Dietitians of Canada

            https://www.dietitians.ca/Downloads/Factsheets/Guidlines-for…

                A healthy vegan diet can meet all your nutrient needs at any stage of life including when you are pregnant, breastfeeding or for older adults.

            The British National Health Service

            http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Vegetarianhealth/Pages/Vegandiets…

                With good planning and an understanding of what makes up a healthy, balanced vegan diet, you can get all the nutrients your body needs.

            The British Nutrition Foundation

            https://www.nutrition.org.uk/healthyliving/helpingyoueatwell…

                Well planned vegetarian and vegan diets can be nutritious and healthy … Studies of UK vegetarian and vegan children have revealed that their growth and development are within the normal range.

            The Dietitians Association of Australia

            https://daa.asn.au/smart-eating-for-you/smart-eating-fast-fa…

                Vegan diets are a type of vegetarian diet, where only plant-based foods are eaten. With good planning, those following a vegan diet can cover all their nutrient bases, but there are some extra things to consider.

            The United States Department of Agriculture

            http://www.choosemyplate.gov/tips-vegetarians

                Vegetarian diets (see context) can meet all the recommendations for nutrients. The key is to consume a variety of foods and the right amount of foods to meet your calorie needs. Follow the food group recommendations for your age, sex, and activity level to get the right amount of food and the variety of foods needed for nutrient adequacy. Nutrients that vegetarians may need to focus on include protein, iron, calcium, zinc, and vitamin B12.

            The National Health and Medical Research Council

            https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/n55_…

                Appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthy and nutritionally adequate. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the lifecycle. Those following a strict vegetarian or vegan diet can meet nutrient requirements as long as energy needs are met and an appropriate variety of plant foods are eaten throughout the day

            The Mayo Clinic

            http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/nutrition-and-healt…

                A well-planned vegetarian diet (see context) can meet the needs of people of all ages, including children, teenagers, and pregnant or breast-feeding women. The key is to be aware of your nutritional needs so that you plan a diet that meets them.

            The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada

            https://www.heartandstroke.ca/get-healthy/healthy-eating/spe…

                Vegetarian diets (see context) can provide all the nutrients you need at *any age,** as well as some additional health benefits.

    • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 14:33

      I would say the "more evolved" see the unnecessary violence there and no longer do that

      Vegans honestly wonder why people hate listening to them…

  • jimbobaus on 18/03/2020 - 23:29

    Lol using Explained as a resource… this is where you lost me.

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:03
      +2

      Why? Because you don't agree that information should be presented in the form of a tv show?

  • Samsungnote10 on 19/03/2020 - 03:08
    +4

    What about health?
    I believe generally the mock versions are higher in fats and salts and other artificial stuff to make it taste similar

    If it's going to make me fat or unhealthy, no thanks

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:39

      That's another aspect that I could have/should have elaborated on in the initial post.

      As it stands, over-consumption of red and processed meats are directly linked with cancers such as bowel cancer. This is unhealthy.

      Whilst the alternatives are currently full of additives that make them unhealthy in other ways, there is a chance that in the future we will have near-identical plant or protein-based products that are simply on-line with regular meat in terms of health.

      So while I understand your point, it was more a question on morality and sustainability than health.

      • EightImmortals on 19/03/2020 - 09:08
        +1

        "over-consumption of red and processed meats are directly linked with cancers such as bowel cancer."

        So instead of over-consuming red meat is it OK if I just eat a nominal amount?

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 09:51

          In theory, yes. But you may face a moral conundrum upon examining where your res meat comes from and why it comes from those places.

          • EightImmortals on 19/03/2020 - 09:57

            @Faro: We have a few cows so I know full where where meat comes from. It's sad for sure but having gone vegetarian for a year or so a while back and not doing very well on it I recognise my requirement for real meat. There's not much that science has tried to replicate that has turned out as good as the real thing in many fields and that hasn't changed with fake meat. I wish the world was perfect, it isn't, and making myself unhealthy probably isn't the best thing I can do to change that. :)

            • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:01

              @EightImmortals: What about being vegetarian made you unhealthy? I'm genuinely curious as it it sort of conflicts with what some other people are saying here (and yes, I understand this will be a subjective experience).

              • EightImmortals on 19/03/2020 - 10:13

                @Faro: I just didn't feel like I was thriving if that makes any sense?

                Anyway, our power is going off the day so I wont be able to reply further until this arvo.

                Cheers

      • Samsungnote10 on 19/03/2020 - 09:49

        i didnt consider the health aspects of eating red meat, however,

        if price = same or lower
        health implications= same or lower
        taste=I couldnt tell the difference, or very minimal difference that I could get used to

        its a definite Go'er for me
        in fact I went to the fake meat section before the corona virus and had a look, but didnt buy because it was something like $8 for 2 patties at super market

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 09:53

          Yeah this is the sort of reaponse I was hoping we'd uncover in this discussion.

          I don't necessarily believe anyone is against the idea of ceasing needless slaughter and over-production of cattle.

          • Samsungnote10 on 19/03/2020 - 10:00

            @Faro: also doesnt help that ive known a few vegetarisn by religious purposes, and a few by choice, and either they are overweight, and/or generally unhealthy looking,

            even the ones by choice said they often felt lathargic

            i have been a vegetarian before for 12 months years ago, and I found it relatively easy, the hardest part was eating out,

            • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:04

              @Samsungnote10: Fortunately I've found a lot more places are offering vegetarian options nowadays. On top of that, one of my favourite food places (if not my very favourite) to eat out is a Hare Krishna restaurant about 10 minutes from my house. Cheap and quality food without meat is really great.

              I should mention I'm not vegetarian, but am trying to cut down my red meat consumption.

              • Samsungnote10 on 19/03/2020 - 10:16

                @Faro: i dont mind vegetarian food, however, australian/european veg food seems relatively healthy, unless its got heaps of cheese on it, indian food to me seems/feels unhealthy

                im on a diet at the moment

  • mrkorrupt on 19/03/2020 - 08:15
    +2

    Why do we need these Fake Meat, Why cant meat eaters eat a good vegetarian biryani, or a good vegetarian omellete, a nice salad for example, why Fake meat i never know

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:32
      +1

      So the understanding is that eating meat is such a heavily ingrained aspect of our modern culture, that a lot of people who are accustomed to doing so cannot envision how radically they'd have to change their diet if they were to try and become vegetarian (even if they are morally opposed to the slaughter and over-production of animals that bolsters the meat industry).

      Because of this, companies have been trying to create a meat alternative that can take the place of regular meat in people's meals, but at the moment nothing tastes exactly like the real thing and may be quite unhealthy due to the amount of salt and other ingredients companies are using to try and simulate the "meat effect".

      If you know much about addiction and addictive behaviours, I'd say meat falls into that category for a lot of people also.

  • orangetrain on 19/03/2020 - 08:35

    Make the fake meat alternatives cheaper and most people switch. It shits me that they're more expensive or same price as real meat.

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:44

      Thanks for actually responding to the original question. I'm interested in people's general thoughts on this.

      For what reasons would you switch if the alternatives were the same price as the real thing? Is it morality or for the health of the planet(as it would be for me)? Or is there another factor at play?

      • orangetrain on 19/03/2020 - 08:49
        +1

        Focus on quantity, quality and price. At the moment, quantity is there but not quality/price.

        For health of planet, I leave it up to government. Cotton farms consume a lot of water while a kangaroo farm doesn't consume as much. The government may be inefficient but they have money and time while consumers will have NFI what's best for planet. Implement a water/carbon price.

  • [Deactivated] on 19/03/2020 - 08:43
    +3

    With the world now reeling from the consequence of being interreliant, having another staple source of food become unattainable without further reliance on manufacturing is not something I'd agree with.

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:48

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this more an issue with how our geopolitical/economic systems work? The idea that the cost and scarcity of these products due to importing and exporting in times of global stress are limited or restricted?

      • [Deactivated] on 19/03/2020 - 08:56
        +5

        I can hunt my own game and slaughter my own livestock.

        I don't know how to mash stuff to make "meat".

        If I grow reliant on fake meat, maybe I can still hunt and farm but that skill will diminish and my offspring will forget it completely.

        Scarcity aside, the culture of depending on society as the only means of survival is ridiculous.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 08:58
          +2

          I'm sorry but are you literally Ron Swanson?

          • [Deactivated] on 19/03/2020 - 09:00
            +3

            @Faro: No but I am a devout Swansoner.

  • armdrags on 19/03/2020 - 09:40
    +1

    Vegetarians/vegans wanting to eat meat alternatives are the equivalent of a carnivore wanting to eat vegetable/plant alternatives.

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 09:56

      Considering carnivores don't have the same moral ethics as humans (considering no human is a biological carnivore), this analogy doesn't hold a lot of weight.

      • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:07
        +1

        No human is a biological herbivore either. As you pointed out, we're omnivores.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:12

          Exactly. But people have shown they can survive on a plant based diet. Omnivores can process either food. Carnivores only desire meat and will die if that requirement is not fulfilled.

          The original analogy suggested that a carnivore (let's say a tiger for example) may decide they want to eat bamboo because they saw a panda do it and thought it looked wonderful and healthy. This doesn't happen.

          • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:26

            @Faro:

            Carnivores only desire meat and will die if that requirement is not fulfilled.

            No, that's only obligate carnivores, like cats.

            Though I get your point that vegetarians can have ethics as their reasoning, and not an actual preference taste or nutrition wise for a plant based diet.

          • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 14:37

            @Faro: Where do vegans get B12 if we don't have factories making supplements?

            • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 15:11

              @brendanm: I don't understand the relevance of the question here.

              I also don't know the answer

              • brendanm on 19/03/2020 - 16:59

                @Faro:

                People have shown they can survive on a plant based diet.

                This may be true, however they need supplements. B12 doesn't occur in plants. We need B12.

  • lesleigh on 19/03/2020 - 09:42

    This fake meat tastes bloody awful, I have tried it like I imagine flavored sawdust would taste.

  • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:08

    It's overconsumption of red meat that is the issue, not any consumption of it at all. That means so long as you moderate your intake, you can mitigate the health effects.

    • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:16

      But it makes you wonder a little bit, doesn't it?

      Remember, there was once a time when smoking was meant to have no effects on your health.

      How closely intertwined are our meat and dairy industries with governing bodies? Just look at how much new information about the consumption meat and its correlation with health has come out just in the last 10 years or so.

      Remember, our governments also don't seem to care about climate change and a large contributing factor to that is the cattle industry.

      Just food for thought 🤷‍♂️

      • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:29
        +2

        Cigarettes are wholly artificial, as is the act of deliberately inhaling smoke from burnt plants.

        Eating meat cannot be more natural since humans are naturally omnivores.

        Having said that, that's a naturalistic fallacy, though the flip (flip) side is that the act of breathing oxidises your cells, killing telomeres in your DNA, and hastening your death by senescence.

        To live is to die. Much better to focus on the quality of the time we have, and in my and many others' estimation, that involves eating food that tastes good - meat.

        • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:31
          +1

          But then if living your personal life to a higher quality means to take life from another or decrease the quality of those around you, is it still justifiable?

          • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:33

            @Faro: That's what the field of ethics tries to answer.

            But evidently to society in general, the answer is yes.

            • Faro on 19/03/2020 - 10:36

              @HighAndDry: Based on our capitalistic systems, maybe.

              Without delving too deep into philosophy and political systems, I do believe we can live a collectively better life for ourselves and each other by questioning a lot of the modern systems we have in place today.

              • HighAndDry on 19/03/2020 - 10:43

                @Faro: Of course. There's always room to improve.

  • Beanvee on 19/03/2020 - 14:20
    +1

    Alternatives that are plant based and whatnot? Nah. But things like lab grown meat? Sure.

  • crashloaded on 19/03/2020 - 14:42

    I would do it now but it's too expensive.

  • ozhunter on 19/03/2020 - 23:17

    Nope.

    1. I'm a creationist.
    2. When you hear things like this, it makes you hard to trust what they actually put in there.
    3. Meat is super healthy.
    • Faro on 20/03/2020 - 11:20

      Meat is not as healthy as you probably think. Especially if you're consuming it daily and at large quantities.

      As a creationist, how closely do you follow the word of the Bible?

      • ozhunter on 20/03/2020 - 11:49

        Forgot to add, but taste is obviously a big reason why I eat it too.

        Meat is not as healthy as you probably think. Especially if you're consuming it daily and at large quantities.

        It seems to be full of nutrients and has served mankind well for many years.

        It's funny how WHO classifies processed meat as Group 1 carcinogen, yet red meat as Group 2A. That alone would say the "processing" definitely causes it to be carcinogenic.

        As a creationist, how closely do you follow the word of the Bible?

        I think I do a pretty good job. Always room for improvement. :D Not sure what it has to do with eating meat. It's permissible, does not mean we have to do it. I think that's the same for at least the two most followed religions.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join