The Impossible Burger 2.0

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 11:55am

gozunda wrote: »

Why the pedantism? As you claimed - it's to be available here shortly. How'd do you think there going to get it from the US to Europe? Magic it with unicorns and fairy dust?

The vast distances involved in shipping soybean meal and all the other additives including the synthesised vitamins and other ingredients even before this product leaves the US is quite staggering tbh. All highly processed foodstuffs have a large ecological footprint due to the high usage of fossil fuels and transport- these being the number one cause of greenhouse gases.

At the end of the day it is a type of highly processed junk food - that's it. What more do you want? I've already outlined that all food products have impacts on the environment. The main point you appear to be missing is that locally produced and consumed primary foodstuffs such as vegetables and meat have less of an impact here especially since much of our beef is grass based.

Interesting argument to make when the vast majority of Irish agriculture output is destined, ultimately, for export.

patsy_mccabe · 22-02-2019 11:59am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Interesting argument to make when the vast majority of Irish agriculture output is destined, ultimately, for export.

This is a good thing, no? Especially if we produce at a lower carbon foot print.

_Brian · 22-02-2019 12:02pm

The fact that the margins of society are starting to accept this massively manufactured food as a real healthy alternative is worrying, it’s another step down the road and loss of food culture.

Worse it’s being tarted up as ethical and environmentally friendly and people are lapping up the propaganda.

We need meals with fewer unnecessary ingredients not inventing new ones. Someone posted the ingredients of a commercially produced beef burger, I wouldn’t accept that as good food either.

Humans need to eat food that has the least possible ingredients and processing imvolved.
Cooked on site from fresh ingredients prepared on site.

That’s what we try to do every day, we teach our kids that skill. We buy locally grown veg and fruit where possible, we eat our own meat. We teach them to grow fruit and veg, to rear animals correctly and how good the meat is compared to commercial alternatives.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 12:06pm

DrunkMonkey wrote:

You haven't provided anything to back up your assumption that it's bad for your health.

Lol. I think you are mixing me up with some other poster btw ...

From the available data on the present product - here are the nutritional differences between this product and a beef burger. Please note the a serving as listed is only three ounces. In the US the smallest impossible burger was one-third of a pound, which is 5.3 ounces, so it is necessary to nearly double the nutrition facts information to gauge nutritional guidelines etc.

Here's the full nutritional breakdown of one three-ounce serving of Impossible burger:

220 calories
13 g fat (10 g saturated)
430 mg sodium
20 g protein
5 g carbohydrates
0 g fiber
Less than 1 g sugar

Here's how it compares to a serving of a three-ounce beef burger that's 93 percent lean:

164 calories
8 g fat (3 g saturated)
56 mg sodium
22 g protein
0 g carbohydrates
0 g fibe
0 g sugar

The lowdown?
The present impossible Burger has roughly 29 percent more calories than a traditional beef burger sourced from a butcher. Overall there is more calories, more fat a hell of a lot more salt (sodium) and more carbohydrate in the Impossible burger compared to a beef burger.

What's the other main difference? One is a whole food ie beef. Even in burgers with other ingredients added such as Bufords one above - the additions are again whole foods such as oatmeal.

The impossible burger is made from the derivites of plants eg soy and highly processed additives such as SLH and synthetic vitamins.

Looking just at the SLH and the added Vitamins:

The SLH in the Impossible Burger is extracted from GM yeast, which is fermented in large vats in an industrial setting. The yeast must be grown in a nutrient-rich broth made of chemically synthesized ingredients that are themselves industrially manufactured.

The vitamins in the impossible burger are another example of highly processed ingredients. The vast majority of vitamins are not natural extracts from foods but are synthetic. They may be produced by chemical synthesis or from extracted biological processes using algae, bacteria, or fungi (including yeasts).

Even most vegans advocate for a whole food diet - in their case plants. What the impossible burger is highly processed junk food - not a wholefood. Beef is a primary product and as bought from a good local butcher is a primary unprocessed foodstuff.

Is the impossible food 'bad for you? I have no idea but I'll guess we will find out in time. I will continue to eat beef in moderation. And I certainly wont be buying this rubbish.

It is evident that no amount of fact or information is going to shift your rather inexplicable promotion of this product considering you haven't even tried one yet. But there you go ...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 12:10pm

I'm glad you said it, a commercially produced beef burger that's what you should be comparing this to. Neither are comparable to the meat some of us enjoy. A lot of consumers don't have access to it, I know I wouldn't if it wasn't for the larger family and their role in the beef and dairy business.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 12:13pm

gozunda wrote: »

Lol. I think you are mixing me up with some other poster btw ...

From the available data on the present product - here are the nutritional differences between this product and a beef burger. Please note the a serving as listed is only three ounces. In the US the smallest impossible burger was one-third of a pound, which is 5.3 ounces, so it is necessary to nearly double the nutrition facts information to gauge nutritional guidelines etc.

Here's the full nutritional breakdown of one three-ounce serving of Impossible burger:

220 calories
13 g fat (10 g saturated)
430 mg sodium
20 g protein
5 g carbohydrates
0 g fiber
Less than 1 g sugar

Here's how it compares to a serving of a three-ounce beef burger that's 93 percent lean:

164 calories
8 g fat (3 g saturated)
56 mg sodium
22 g protein
0 g carbohydrates
0 g fibe
0 g sugar

The lowdown?
The present impossible Burger has roughly 29 percent more calories than a traditional beef patty. Overall there is more calories, more fat a hell of a lot more salt (sodium) and more carbohydrate in the Impossible burger compared to a beef burger.

What's the other main difference? One is a whole food ie beef. Even in burgers with other ingredients added such as Bufords one above - the additions are again whole foods such as oatmeal.

The impossible burger is made from the derivites of plants eg soy and highly processed additives such as SLH and synthetic vitamins.

Looking just at the SLH and the added Vitamins:

The SLH in the Impossible Burger is extracted from GM yeast, which is fermented in large vats in an industrial setting. The yeast must be grown in a nutrient-rich broth made of chemically synthesized ingredients that are themselves industrially manufactured.

The vitamins in the impossible burger are another example of highly processed ingredients. The vast majority of vitamins are not natural extracts from foods but are synthetic. They may be produced by chemical synthesis or from extracted biological processes using algae, bacteria, or fungi (including yeasts).

Even most vegans advocate for a whole food diet - in their case plants. What the impossible burger is highly processed junk food - not a wholefood. Beef is a primary product and as bought from a good local butcher is a primary unprocessed foodstuff.

Is the impossible food 'bad for you? I have no idea but I'll guess we will find out in time.

It is evident that no amount of fact or information is going to shift your rather inexplicable promotion of this product considering you haven't even tried one yet. But there you go ...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You've left out a lot of ingredients to make it seem the beef is better it just makes rubbish of your whole agreement when you won't even post the truth when it's already been given in the thread.
You whole argument is made on assumption without any facts.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 12:14pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Interesting argument to make when the vast majority of Irish agriculture output is destined, ultimately, for export.

Why dont you misquote my comment as well while your at it? I was comparing and advocating local consumption of primary produce such as beef versus the importation of highly processed foodstuffs from the US.

The fact remains that the bulk of Ireland's agricultural exports go to mostly adjacent markets in the UK and Europe. And the reason Ireland produces a surplus to export is because of the fact that Irelands sustainable production is largely grass based and of a high quality.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 12:16pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You've left out a lot of ingredients to make it seem the beef is better it just makes rubbish of your whole agreement when you won't even post the truth when it's already been given in the thread.
You whole argument is made on assumption without any facts.

Have I? Thats the way I eat my meat - I'd suggest you do the same. The impossible burger is highly processed junk food. But as I said - l It is evident that no amount of fact or information is going to shift your rather inexplicable promotion of this product considering you haven't even tried one yet. But there you go ...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 12:27pm

gozunda wrote: »

Why dont you misquote my comment as well while your at it? I was comparing and advocating local consumption of primary produce such as beef versus the importation of highly processed foodstuffs from the US.

The fact remains that the bulk of Ireland's agricultural exports go to mostly adjacent markets in the UK and Europe. And the reason Ireland produces a surplus to export is because of the fact that Irelands sustainable production is largely grass based and of a high quality.

It's not a misquote, and Irish agriculture is not on a sustainable footing btw, not at it's current output.

Take away all the carbon inputs including the tractors, the fossil fuel derived fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides, antibiotics and where would production be? 20% of today?

Agriculture in Ireland hasn't been truly sustainable since mechanisation was introduced.

_Brian · 22-02-2019 12:32pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm glad you said it, a commercially produced beef burger that's what you should be comparing this to. Neither are comparable to the meat some of us enjoy. A lot of consumers don't have access to it, I know I wouldn't if it wasn't for the larger family and their role in the beef and dairy business.

Cuts of Irish meat are insanely cheap to buy. Almost nobody in Ireland is precluded from it based on price. Lots of people have convinced themselves they can’t cook properly, largely based on cunning advertising drives from commercial entities similar to the one that produces that muck imitation burger.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 12:44pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's not a misquote, and Irish agriculture is not on a sustainable footing btw, not at it's current output.Take away all the carbon inputs including the tractors, the fossil fuel derived fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides, antibiotics and where would production be? 20% of today? Agriculture in Ireland hasn't been truly sustainable since mechanisation was introduced.

What is your point? Get rid of mechcanisation? So I guess for you to live sustainably you have given up your car etc, no longer use public transport, grow and consume your own food and use no fossil fuels whatsoever? Well done you..

Ths fact is Ireland historically and today has always been a net exporter of agricultural produce because what we produce is largely based on a relativly low input grassland system

Btw I see you are trotting out the usual bullskite. Antibiotic use etc is strictly regulated and used primarily for animal welfare purposes under the direction of the DOA and veterinarians.

If you're worried about herbicides and pesticides - go and take a look at what is used in the cultivation of soybeans which are processed into those lovely impossible bergers.

At the end of the day - local consumption of primary foodstuffs such as beef is a hell of a lot more sustainable than importing highly processed junk food from the US. End of story.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 1:33pm

_Brian wrote: »

Cuts of Irish meat are insanely cheap to buy. Almost nobody in Ireland is precluded from it based on price. Lots of people have convinced themselves they can’t cook properly, largely based on cunning advertising drives from commercial entities similar to the one that produces that muck imitation burger.

Where are these cunning advertisement your referring to, where are people afraid to cook.
Your hatred for this burger is clouding all common sense.

You'd swear it's nothing but tree hugging hippies running the Irish meat industry the way your going on. Next you'll tell us there powering the meat factory's on unicorn poop.

Upstream · 22-02-2019 1:43pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You'd swear it's nothing but tree hugging hippies running the Irish meat industry the way your going on. Next you'll tell us there powering the meat factory's on unicorn poop.

I told you about how cows can help soils sequester carbon and so can help reverse global warming. (Can help, not will help, it comes down to management practices and people's choices) and you didn't believe me, so I don't think you're ready to believe in unicorns just yet

Did you think I was making that up?

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 1:48pm

So your acknowledging there's a problem and you know what's needed to fix it. That's great but do you think the UK, US and Brasil give a contintental how ethical we are.
The factory farms in the US and UK the cattle hardly know what grass is.

emaherx · 22-02-2019 1:49pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Take away all the carbon inputs including the tractors, the fossil fuel derived fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides, antibiotics and where would production be? 20% of today?

Agriculture in Ireland hasn't been truly sustainable since mechanisation was introduced.

Please tell me more about all these antibiotics we use. I keep hearing about it from people who know nothing about farming but have not seen any supporting evidence.

Also herbicides and pesticides use would be low in animal agriculture compared to plant based farming.

emaherx · 22-02-2019 1:51pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So your acknowledging there's a problem and you know what's needed to fix it. That's great but do you think the UK, US and Brasil give a contintental how ethical we are.
The factory farms in the US and UK the cattle hardly know what grass is.

So another reason to support Irish meat, surely?

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 1:55pm

emaherx wrote: »

So another reason to support Irish meat, surely?

Who's knocking Irish Meat? 100% support it but how much of it are we importing via supermarkets. There must be some of that UK factory meat making its way onto shelves here.
When you see the empty boxes outside the Chinese or Italian the country of origin isn't Ireland. Not even the EU in some cases. The turkey in the local hotel comes from Poland. There's foreign meat all over the place.
I'd tarrif the hell out of meat imports if I was in charge.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 1:57pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

...

You'd swear it's nothing but tree hugging hippies running the Irish meat industry the way your going on. Next you'll tell us there powering the meat factory's on unicorn poop.

"Meat factories" :eek: I knew it cows are artificial - something I've suspected all along! And it was your disbelief at the detail of how deranged importing of highly processed junk food from the US which elicited my reference about Unicorns and fairy dust.

Ok we get it - you reckon that the 'I cant believe it's an impossibility frankenberger' product is the best thing since sliced bread.

This even though you haven't tried it and you wont believe anyone else who has pointed out why it's not all cracked up to what the manufacturers claim lol.

Ok thanks for that....

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 1:59pm

gozunda wrote: »

What is your point? Get rid of mechcanisation? So I guess for you to live sustainably you have given up your car etc, no longer use public transport, grow and consume your own food and use no fossil fuels whatsoever? Well done you..

Ths fact is Ireland historically and today has always been a net exporter of agricultural produce because what we produce is largely based on a relativly low input grassland system

Btw I see you are trotting out the usual bullskite. Antibiotic use etc is strictly regulated and used primarily for animal welfare purposes under the direction of the DOA and veterinarians.

If you're worried about herbicides and pesticides - go and take a look at what is used in the cultivation of soybeans which are processed into those lovely impossible bergers.

At the end of the day - local consumption of primary foodstuffs such as beef is a hell of a lot more sustainable than importing highly processed junk food from the US. End of story.

My point is you can't claim that Irish agriculture is sustainable, relatively low input or not. I can accept that the Irish system is more sustainable than others, but thats it. A head in the sand attitude about the change that's coming (typified by some posters here) will see a lot left behind.

When we look at technologies like plant based meat analogues as well as lab grown meat it's easy to understand why farmers would be so dismissive of them, it's an obvious threat to the existing market. The changes that are only on the horizon now need to be prepared for not ignored. Dismiss this as highly processed US junk food at your peril.

Irish farming needs to be looking for it's new market, be that in energy crops, beef analogue feedstocks or other inputs, in a post animal reared beef landscape

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 2:00pm

There's nobody in the thread has tried it.

my3cents · 22-02-2019 2:03pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There's nobody in the thread has tried it.

We don't need to to know that its not as environmentally friendly as the hype would have it.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 2:10pm

my3cents wrote: »

We don't need to to know that its not as environmentally friendly as the hype would have it.

It's made like beer, some of the posters above have no idea how the soy based product is created. They assume it's industrial farming it's not if they bothered to check out the facts. One vat of the Heme can make 20,000 burgers. No tractors required.

emaherx · 22-02-2019 2:40pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's made like beer, some of the posters above have no idea how the soy based product is created. They assume it's industrial farming it's not if they bothered to check out the facts. One vat of the Heme can make 20,000 burgers. No tractors required.

So no energy input in any part of it's creation or chemical usage..... Unicorn poop?

emaherx · 22-02-2019 2:43pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

My point is you can't claim that Irish agriculture is sustainable, relatively low input or not. I can accept that the Irish system is more sustainable than others, but thats it. A head in the sand attitude about the change that's coming (typified by some posters here) will see a lot left behind.

When we look at technologies like plant based meat analogues as well as lab grown meat it's easy to understand why farmers would be so dismissive of them, it's an obvious threat to the existing market. The changes that are only on the horizon now need to be prepared for not ignored. Dismiss this as highly processed US junk food at your peril.

Irish farming needs to be looking for it's new market, be that in energy crops, beef analogue feedstocks or other inputs, in a post animal reared beef landscape

How can you claim such a thing when you have already proven you know vert little about Irish animal agriculture?

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 2:52pm

emaherx wrote: »

Please tell me more about all these antibiotics we use. I keep hearing about it from people who know nothing about farming but have not seen any supporting evidence.

Also herbicides and pesticides use would be low in animal agriculture compared to plant based farming.

Antibiotics are used for the treatment of common infections study as mastitis and pink eye. These are not administered by a vet.

Herbicide use might be low, but there's plenty used - particularly to control rushes.

Anything else you'd like to know?

Buford T. Justice XIX · 22-02-2019 2:57pm

Upstream wrote: »

I told you about how cows can help soils sequester carbon and so can help reverse global warming. (Can help, not will help, it comes down to management practices and people's choices) and you didn't believe me, so I don't think you're ready to believe in unicorns just yet

Did you think I was making that up?

Funny you should mention that...
https://twitter.com/agronomistag/status/1098590918087593984
And the actual paper that tweet is from...https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/content/Tilling-Grasslands-Immediately-Reduces-Soil-Health-Indicators
That's quite a good proxy for estimating the C losses from tilling soil for the crops used to make this fake burger. And it's also a good proxy to indicate the levels of C sequestration that grassland is capable of, once the fetishist vegan agenda goes out of fashion again.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So your acknowledging there's a problem and you know what's needed to fix it. That's great but do you think the UK, US and Brasil give a contintental how ethical we are.
The factory farms in the US and UK the cattle hardly know what grass is.

A huge proportion of US beef is derived from suckler cows grazing marginal lands and high altitudes where crops other than grass don't grow. So they would have been at grass, in most cases, for a minimum of 7 months before sale to fatteners. Again, a small bit of googling will confirm this.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 22-02-2019 3:00pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Antibiotics are used for the treatment of common infections study as mastitis and pink eye. These are not administered by a vet.

Herbicide use might be low, but there's plenty used - particularly to control rushes.

Anything else you'd like to know?

No, in the majority of cases, they are administered by the stockman.

But it has to be prescribed by a vet who has attended on farm within the previous 30 days before it can be distributed.

Anything else you'd like to know?

gozunda · 22-02-2019 3:02pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

My point is you can't claim that Irish agriculture is sustainable, relatively low input or not. I can accept that the Irish system is more sustainable than others, but thats it. A head in the sand attitude about the change that's coming (typified by some posters here) will see a lot left behind.
...

You asked

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You haven't explained why (impossible burger) is not sustainable, or at a minimum less sustainable than traditional beef production. ..

And I answered and detailed how Irish beef production is a helluva more sustainable than importing highly processed junk food from the US.

It is of interest that you are now making judgements on the totality of Irish agriculture. May I ask as to where you have gained such incredible expertise?

It is evident that one of the main issues with these artificial burgers and lab grown meats is that they are being pushed by giant multi national interests who couldn't give a fig where or how they sourced their raw ingredients.

What is truly deeply concerning is that unfortunately some are swallowing the constant misinformation we are being fed. Just like the often repeated and false claim that animal agriculture was responsible for 51% of all ghg emissions. Not only has this been debunked - we have witnessed various other vested corporate interests pushing plant based products behind the recent EAT report. Then the Blue Horizon Corporation behind the cynical attempt to bribe the catholic church over lent etc etc etc.

It would be naive indeed not to believe that consumers are being targeted by these corporations - who are hell bent on securing a market share for their trade marked products worldwide. What you can be sure of is that they dont give a monkey's about locally sourced or healthy whole foods.

It remains the Irish landscape by its virtue of climate and topography is uniquely suited to animal agriculture. That's not going to change no matter what the propaganda being pushed or the highly processed products being marketed.

gozunda · 22-02-2019 3:08pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There's nobody in the thread has tried it.

And yet you are the main one pushing it? #social influencer?

Upstream · 22-02-2019 3:08pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

My point is you can't claim that Irish agriculture is sustainable, relatively low input or not. I can accept that the Irish system is more sustainable than others, but thats it. A head in the sand attitude about the change that's coming (typified by some posters here) will see a lot left behind.

When we look at technologies like plant based meat analogues as well as lab grown meat it's easy to understand why farmers would be so dismissive of them, it's an obvious threat to the existing market. The changes that are only on the horizon now need to be prepared for not ignored. Dismiss this as highly processed US junk food at your peril.

Irish farming needs to be looking for it's new market, be that in energy crops, beef analogue feedstocks or other inputs, in a post animal reared beef landscape

We don't have our heads in the sand, we just see things differently, we see what's being pushed here, and we don't like it.

These things you call plant based meat analogues, we see as junk food.

Then you tell us we're not sustainable and to throw away our current methods of beef production. Where do we see this going? It means loading up on chemical fertilizers and pesticides and intensive industrial food production practices to produce what you call beef analogue feedstocks for big industrial corporations.

Why do you want us to do that?

The Impossible Burger 2.0

Comments