
Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat's plant-based burgers aren't healthier - SirLJ
https://www.businessinsider.com/beyond-burger-vs-impossible-burger-vs-fast-food-burger-nutrition-2019-6
======
hallihax
Speaking as somebody who does enjoy a vegan boiger - 'health' and 'nutrition'
are not things I'm looking at when I want a burger.

This whole debate is one big straw-man. I'm a vegan. I don't need burgers. I
might _want_ burgers, but they don't form a part of a standard diet just in
the same way any kind of burger probably shouldn't form part of anybody's
regular diet.

If you're eating processed food - there's a considerable chance that whatever
it is you're eating - vegan or otherwise - is neither nutritious nor healthy.
It probably tastes good though, which is why you want it in the first place.

Ultimately it boils down to this: if I'm eating a burger, then nutrition and
health are more or less irrelevant - I'm after taste. I think the lives of
animals are more important than my taste-buds, so I eat plant-based burgers.
It's not really any more complicated than that.

~~~
sametmax
Precisely.

And if you have enough veggies and vegans around you, you know that they can
eat as much junk food as everyone else.

Sugar is vegan, after all.

~~~
selectodude
I don't know many skinny vegetarians. Eating nothing but carbs and butter is
vegetarian and extremely unhealthy.

~~~
maccard
There are plenty of super high protein vegetatian and vegan options available.
Many nuts, and pulses are in the same ballpark as even red meat.

Consider that most people aren't strictly carnivorous, and are usually pairing
a burger with 600 calories of fries, and a 400 calorie bun, which is all carb.

~~~
vibrato
Nothing is in the same ballpark as red meat in terms of nutrition density and
bioavailability.

~~~
maccard
A beef steak is about 270 calories for 30g of protein, cooked lentils are
about 22g for the same number of calories. I'm not researched enough in
bioavailability to comment on that part.

For an 80kg man, the "recommended" protein intake is about 64g, the difference
in calories is fairly minute (assuming you compare 100% meat vs 100% lentils).
If you're training/weightlifting and following the advice of 2-3g per kg of
bodyweight, you're almost certainly going to supplement your protein intake
anyway. Protein supplements are 2-3x the density of red meat, and available in
vegan options if that's your thing.

~~~
vibrato
The bioavailability of protein from lentils is about 60%. So your cherrypicked
comparison has about 50% of the useful protein content of beef.

Macronutrients are not the entire picture. If you look into micronutrients
you’ll find all of the essentials in beef, some are not found at all in plant
sources.

Be careful about all fda recommendations, they were heavily influenced by
lobbying from the sugar / grain / cereal industry and are not being updated in
step with science.

------
mark_l_watson
My wife and I really enjoy both IF and BM burgers - just be sure to not
overlook them!

They do contain a lot of fat from vegetable oil but they are very low in
cholesterol. I will trade more sodium for the advantages for me of reducing
cholesterol.

They really taste good. We like them on good rolls, purple onion, tomato,
lettuce, and whatever sauce we feel like. Fantastic tasting burgers.

There is also the advantages of not killing animals. My wife and I have just
spent two years living in Illinois (returning home to Sedona Arizona next
week) and our rented home is beside a pasteur and let me tell you that cows
run around like dogs, playing together, and generally have different
personalities - we notice which ones tend to start the running around
playing/games and which ones join in after the game starts. I think most
people in order to make themselves feel better imagine cows and steers as
being dumb animals with no soul or consciousness. Not so. I am not a strict
vegetarian, but personally I feel better about reducing my meat intake.

~~~
perfunctory
I didn't do any history research on the subject but my own conspiracy theory
suggests that the whole "humans have soul, animals don't" thing was invented
to justify the natural world destruction.

~~~
qyv
Animals have killed other animals for food since the dawn of life. You can't
get more"natural" than that. Eating meat is hardly a human invention.

~~~
kbyatnal
The problem is not eating meat. The problem is the horrors of factory farming,
which is as “unnatural” as it gets.

------
anreekoh
1\. Surely there are other chemical compounds that are present in the fast
food meats and not the plant based meats, and vice versa, but that aren’t
listed in the article’s table.

2\. The plant-based meats are intended to imitate real meat as much as
possible, and I would imagine an intuitive way to do this is to include the
same amount of ingredients as on the table presented.

3\. “Healthiness” is probably unfortunately best measured through a large and
well intentioned study, and not objectively by comparing a limited list of
ingredients.

~~~
qyv
I know for a fact that McDonald's beef burgers, at least in North America,
have a single ingredient: beef. They go directly from source grind to patty
maker to freezer, nothing is added.

~~~
anreekoh
Sorry, I meant that the chemical makeup of beef is distinct from that of
plants. I wasn't referring to additives. I meant the proteins/enzymes, etc.

------
bpatel576
I didn't even realize that the companies mission was to create a product that
was "healthier." I always assumed that it was to create something that was
more sustainable...

------
sdfasdfasdfsdfw
Their goal was to make a 100% plant-based alternative to meat that tastes like
meat.

Plenty of other reasons to not eat meat. Humaneness toward animals? climate
change?

Also, regardless of above, not 100% onboard with the premise. I'll be
interested in long-term studies. Impossible has been around less than 10
years.

------
nextstep
Veganism is not a health choice for most vegans, it’s an ethical one. Plant-
based foods use fewer resources per calorie and do not require cruel treatment
of animals.

~~~
fao_
> Plant-based foods use fewer resources per calorie and do not require cruel
> treatment of animals.

They kind of have to at some point, otherwise you're using artificial nitrogen
to top up the soil and that's not just bad for the soil but is also depleting
a limited resource (The nitrogen comes from what IIRC is, a single mine).

I remember reading about some farmers that managed to buck the usual
statistics by getting around half a thousand chickens to an acre of farmland
-- the chickens acted as a natural form of pest-control for the farmland, and
their shit and corpses (when they died) provided a natural source for the NPK
needed to feed the soil.

The thing is, vegans forget that plants, etc. have all evolved with death as
part of the equation. Animal death is required in some form, to supply the
micro-organisms in the soil with the proper nutrients. Anyone who has studied
farming and agriculture knows that the ideal isn't to eliminate animal death
(something that is pretty much impossible unless you want to destabilize the
ecosystem and starve your plants), but try to minimize it and ensure that the
death is not wasted.

I think this mistake in understanding goes back to school, where children are
taught that if you give plants soil, water and sunlight, they will grow. They
could take that opportunity to talk about the NPK cycle, the billions of
micro-organisms in the soil that need to be fed to provide the plants with
nutrients, the fact that dead animals help feed the plants and the micro-
organisms, etc. Not teaching children about this when children are capable of
understanding it is a disservice given that for many people that is the _only_
schooling that they will ever have on farming and agriculture.

~~~
xgulfie
You realize most of the atmosphere is Nitrogen, right? I would not call it a
limited resource. Clovers and other cover crops also fix hydrogen.

~~~
mykowebhn
Atmospheric nitrogen is very common. Nitrogen that is in a form that's usable
by plants is not so common.

Many plants in the Fabaceae family, of which clover is a member, fix nitrogen,
not hydrogen. I think that's what you probably meant.

~~~
xgulfie
Yeah I meant to say nitrogen but said hydrogen

------
dr_dshiv
"Barclays concluded that when it comes to plant-based citizens, many are
"thinking that they are healthier than what they really are.""

I'm assuming this was retranslated --from burger to citizen

~~~
aitchnyu
Spell checks for fat fingers seem more likely if you compare the first 3
letters of each word: C and B - one key away, I abd U - neighbours, T and R -
neighbours, I and G - far away.

------
scotchbonnet
To me this conclusion does not fit with a few points: quality of fats, overall
quantity of fat, protein quantity, and fiber.

I'm not making any overarching conclusion about what is healthier, but I do
think the article's conclusion is pretty weak.

------
xipho
I mean this is obvious, right? Salads on fast-food menus have more fat and
other "bad stuff" than burgers thanks to cheese, dressing etc. Your FF faux
burger is still fried, cheesed, sauced etc. Next please.

------
52-6F-62
I’m pretty sure this was already known and talked about.

I think the reason it’s reiterated is many people do associate “no meat” with
“more healthy”, whether it’s in error or not. (There’s even a big fad here in
TO of fatty deep fried vegan foods!)

The article is likely not tuned or intended for the audience of HN, but for
people who don’t pay attention to the details of nutrition more.

On a side note, I tried the Beyond Meat patty when they showed up at my
grocery out of curiosity. It caused me _terrible_ GI problems for about 3
days. Never again for me (sparing any details). Only suggestion I could find
as to why was potentially the high amount of canola oil. That and I rarely eat
processed foods, so I’m not sure how much that was a factor.

------
bambax
> _Nutrition is a major reason that people are giving plant-based burger a
> try_

Not really sure about that. Current meat "production" involves destroying the
planet at an accelerated pace while treating animals in the most horrible way
imaginable (and even beyond imagination).

~~~
eof
I think saying “a major reason” is fair and accurate, but I agree that the it
seems people are, in general, much more concerned about the ethics of
industrial farming as it relates to animal cruelty, as well as beef being such
a large contributor to co2.

~~~
gpvos
While I think that's true for many people, I would like to have actual data
about whether the wide public is more swayed by environmental/ethical or
health concerns. Many companies are marketing this from a health angle, and
they may know more than you and me. (Another possibility, which I'm not
discounting, is that they think everyone is as cynical as they are.)

~~~
lprubin
According to this survey, 68.1% of people's main reason for going vegan was
"for the animals" while "health" was only 17.4%.

[https://vomadlife.com/blogs/news/why-people-go-
vegan-2019-gl...](https://vomadlife.com/blogs/news/why-people-go-
vegan-2019-global-survey-results)

That being said, the question was "What is the main reason" so people who said
"for the animals" might also care a lot about health.

~~~
gpvos
Going vegan (which I understand as deciding to only eat vegan from now on) is
a much larger decision than just giving a plant-based burger a try in order to
reduce your meat consumption somewhat.

------
psychometry
There's more to "healthy" than calories and cholesterol. What a trash article.

~~~
gwd
Yeah, I was quite disappointed. Dietary cholesterol doesn't cause arterial
cholesterol. "Fat" is a necessary nutrient, and there are different kinds --
polyunsaturated vegetable fats are different than saturated fat (found in
beef); and even though saturated fat is considered "unhealthy", the actual
scientific evidence for that designation is pretty shaky.

And then, what about fiber? What about the mix of proteins and amino acids?
Vitamins and minerals -- in particular B vitamins, which are difficult to get
from non-animal sources?

So much potential just to say, "It's got fat and salt, so it's just as bad."

------
deboflo
Why is this post even listed here? Business Insider is not a credible news
source. They are a corrupt media organization owned by the shady Axel Springer
SE. They have strong ties to powerful short sellers.

~~~
klez
Then please flag it and move on.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
dpflan
_Currently_ plant-based burgers are not healthier but are nearing taste-
equivalency, but surely it is easier to modify a plant-based burger recipe to
increase "healthiness" than to modify a beef burger (make a healthier
cow...?). [even mentioned at the end of this article]

So if they are health-equivalent, now compare the next variables: impact on
climate, impact on animal welfare, etc.

------
scriptproof
> Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods are continuing to tweak their recipes. The
> Impossible Burger 2.0, for example, launched earlier this year and was
> designed to be substantially healthier (and tastier) than the original, with
> less fat and sodium.

The last sentence cancels the whole purpose of the article. Sodium is the main
concern and new recipe use less sodium. Problem solved.

------
newscracker
Just like people don’t eat burgers for health (with a side of fries or a
supersized portion), these aren’t primarily meant for health either. They
could be a lot healthier than conventional burgers, and they certainly are
when you look at the comparison chart.

> When it comes to calories, fat, and protein, the two options are pretty
> similar. Plant-based burgers have less cholesterol...However, the plant-
> based burgers tend to have more sodium...

Seriously, sodium is one thing that these brands could easily reduce, compared
to other aspects, without compromising much on the taste. This article is a
big nitpick on one tiny part.

Are these being marketed as being way healthier? I thought the main selling
point of these alternatives is against climate change and the disastrous
effect that current animal agriculture has on it (then come animal cruelty and
health). We’d probably be better off if people like the author adopt these
alternatives and cut their sodium intake from other foods.

------
elil17
This article makes a false equivalence between being low calorie and being
healthy. The challenge for many vegans (and vegetarians) is getting enough
energy each day, so it’s actually healthy for plant based options to be highly
caloric.

~~~
skripp
I agree with the first sentence, but the second one makes no sense to me.

Loads of energy in pasta/noodels, rice, potato, plant based oils etc etc.
Getting all amino acids and various nutrients in sufficient amount sure, that
is a problem. Energy is not.

~~~
elil17
The issue is not that high calorie vegan and vegetarian foods don’t exist,
it’s an issue of convenience. Fast food restaurants, for all the hate they
get, are really important sources of food for people who are too busy to cook.
Unlike normal people, vegans can’t just stop at a chain restaurant and order a
filling meal. Most vegans I know have to be exceedingly deliberate to make
sure they eat enough because it’s so hard to find affordable vegan food unless
you cook it yourself.

------
bane
And they're really great with swiss and mushrooms with a side of garlic fries.

Speaking as somebody who isn't even the slightest bit vegetarian, at near
enough the same price as a regular low-end-to-average burger, I'll order it
instead because they taste better and have slightly better mouth feel to me.

It doesn't beat a really high-end burger yet, but those are usually more
expensive than even an IF or BM choice.

To be honest though, I support them because I want to support the general
concept of high-end science being applied to food. After all, if we ever get
off this rock and up into the stars, this is likely to become the direction
our food comes from.

------
notacoward
Whether intentionally or no, Kate Taylor is doing the meat industry's work for
them. Pretty much nobody seems to think that plant-based burgers are
interesting primarily because they're healthier. See any other top-level
comment for examples. Who benefits from a story putting plant-based burgers in
a bad light by "refuting" a claim nobody made or cared about? There are many
answers, but "the public in general" is not one. Even if the effect is not
deliberate, this kind of click-bait seems a bit irresponsible.

~~~
tootie
Per the article, most consumers are interested in plant burgers specifically
for health concerns. I don't understand why you'd dismiss that as irrelevant.
And unless this article is factually incorrect, the reporting is entirely
fair. You can't get mad because you don't like it.

~~~
notacoward
Per the article, which cites one highly dubious data point to support that
claim.

------
alkonaut
Reasons I’d eat (more) vegetarian

1\. Climate

2\. Ethics

...

10\. Nutrition/Health

------
segmondy
I'm not a vegan, never had IF or BM, but I believe that if they taste as good
as the real thing, they will be healthier for mother earth. It takes a lot of
resources to raise beef.

------
MisterBastahrd
They weren't meant to be and never claimed to be. You aren't going to
replicate a beef patty without a ton of fat.

------
tmaly
I hate to attack the messenger but businessinsider is an affiliate based site
that generates revenue with clickbait titles.

------
peterwwillis
Oh. They have some extra salt.

Well I'm sure glad this make it to the front page to stimulate my intellectual
curiosity.

