
The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry? - EastLondonCoder
https://www.outsideonline.com/2399736/impossible-foods-beyond-meat-alt-meat
======
zackmorris
I'm excited for meat alternatives, but have 3 thoughts on them that I haven't
seen mentioned yet (I'm 42):

* Nearly all of the rangeland and high desert in the western US was destroyed by cattle and sheep grazing over the past 150 years. This is a billion dollar industry with the emotional buy-in of millions of people so I'm skeptical that it will be reformed in our lifetimes.

* My digestive system got wrecked trying to be on a mostly vegetarian diet over several years after the housing bubble popped. The gist of it is that the lectins (and other defense mechanisms in the husks) of legumes and nightshades disrupt the mucus lining of the intestines, which leads to leaky gut and stool getting into the body cavity and blood (leaky gut), which may lead to autoimmune diseases like colitis and arthritis. Something about animal protein heals this lining, probably because humans evolved as scavengers eating leftover kills and carrion from top predators.

* I have not yet seen studies comparing the healing and regenerative properties of meat compared to plant protein, especially concerning bodybuilding. In my own experience, there is simply no comparison between the two. Beef, eggs, salmon, tuna, turkey and chicken simply dwarf any gains obtained from bean burritos (I wish this wasn't the case). I don't know a solution to this, although I'm guessing that a portion of the gains are hormonal. Maybe someone can isolate the animal compounds and make supplements similar to creatine, BCAAs, glutamine, taurine, etc.

Not to knock current meat alternatives, but I view them sort of like compact
fluorescent light bulbs, as a 10 or 20 year stopgap until we have true test
tube meat (LED bulbs).

In order for meat alternatives to compete with meat, someone will need to
reform the federal food subsidies that keep meat an order of magnitude cheaper
than it should be. An impossible burger should cost LESS than beef, not more.

~~~
landonxjames
> My digestive system got wrecked trying to be on a mostly vegetarian diet
> over several years after the housing bubble popped. The gist of it is that
> the lectins (and other defense mechanisms in the husks) of legumes and
> nightshades disrupt the mucus lining of the intestines, which leads to leaky
> gut and stool getting into the body cavity and blood (leaky gut), which may
> lead to autoimmune diseases like colitis and arthritis. Something about
> animal protein heals this lining, probably because humans evolved as
> scavengers eating leftover kills and carrion from top predators.

Do you have a citation for this? I've never heard anything like it before.

~~~
zackmorris
Ya sorry, it's a relatively new concept:

[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319593.php](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319593.php)

My feeling is that it's similar to how allergies/cancer/etc often have 2 or
more triggers that must coincide to set off the condition.

So for example, maybe people who wouldn't typically have gluten sensitivity (a
lectin), ended up with it because they distrupted their gut flora by eating,
say, the glyphosate in oats (especially processed oats like Cheerios). It
could also happen if they eat compounds not typically encountered in nature,
like those present in GMO foods.

Western medicine has a blind spot when it comes to these holistic effects
because it tends to mainly study single root causes and cures. We also don't
yet have enough long term studies, because GMOs only went mainstream around
the late 90s and we're only just today able to start tackling big data with
machine learning. But many people were wary of herbacides, pesticides and GMOs
because there were no long term studies yet. Unfortunately a lot of
unscientific practices got rammed to market during the George W Bush years,
and during the dot com boom years before that under Clinton where money
trumped public health concerns. Ok and really all through the 80s as well...

For anyone who reads this, and especially vegetarians dealing with IBS, what
really helped me was the glutamine powder you buy at any workout supplement
shop. Then I laid off legumes and nightshades (especially peanuts and peppers)
for 6 months to let my gut rebuild. Use a pressure cooker to break down the
lectins in beans, and also try de-husked grains like white rice instead of
brown rice, or say sourdough bread over whole wheat bread. Then be aware that
the gut is always breaking down and rebuilding, so treat it maybe like red
meat or alcohol and try limiting yourself to a day or two of beans/salsa in a
row instead of eating them every day. Also the Gundry ProPlant protein powder
(hemp, flax, spirulina) helped me. If you're under 40 and don't yet have IBS,
you might be seeing other symptoms like puffyiness, weight gain and lethargy
that feels kind of like chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia. For me, that
coincided with discovering I had sleep apnea. I had been chronically tired for
as long as a decade.

~~~
intopieces
While I don’t doubt your story and haven’t read your link, what is interesting
to me is that I have been a vegetarian for 13 years haven’t had any of these
symptoms. What explains the variation here?

~~~
losteric
Gut flora - you likely have a healthier microbiome, or at least one that was
able to adapt to a vegetarian diet.

Microbiome variance is a relatively new area of research but studies have
already highlighted links to IBS/IBD, autoimmune conditions, and psychological
conditions.

------
technotony
The naysayers in the comment thread are missing the understanding that the
fundamental technologies driving this are all moving exponentially. Beyond
Meat's innovation came from a Stanford professor who is an expert in RNA
molecules (he helped them figure out their protein structure/selection),
impossible foods is a synthetic biology company. Exponential techs always
underwhelm in the beginning but soon deliver more powerful products than
people imagined. That's going to happen with this industry and faster than
people expect.

~~~
notJim
Maybe with Impossible Foods, but I don't see anything about RNA here:

> The vegan meat substitutes are made from mixtures of pea protein isolates,
> rice protein, mung bean protein, canola oil, coconut oil, and other
> ingredients like potato starch, apple extract, sunflower lecithin, and
> pomegranate powder with a range of vitamins and minerals. Beef products that
> "bleed" are achieved by using beet juice

Just sounds like a veggie burger that tastes better, and has a VC-funded
marketing budget.

~~~
p1necone
I've had a beyond meat burger, I'm curious to hear the opinion of others that
have had one too because I thought it tasted _terrible_. The texture was
nothing like real ground beef and neither was the flavour. It wasn't _good_
different either - I'd much rather have a regular bean burger.

I feel like it's all marketing and they're just riding the hype wave caused by
other better products or peoples desire for one. (I _assume_ the Impossible
Burger is better - they seem to have gone into more effort to replicate beef,
but I haven't tried one)

~~~
Thriptic
I've had the impossible burger on multiple occasions. Every time I've had it,
it felt like whoever cooked it either didn't care or was trying to present the
burger as basically as possible to try to demo it as a discrete product. The
trouble is, that's not how anyone over the age of 10 actually eats any kind of
burger, so it's not really a fair presentation. If you actually season it (it
absolutely needs salt and pepper) and put on equivalent toppings and
condiments, it's really not bad at all in my opinion. I tend to view it like
soylent. It's definitely not as good as a good beef burger, but it's good
enough to consider eating regularly for convenience and health reasons.

~~~
p1necone
I'm a burger purist - lightly toasted then steamed bun, patty with the right
fat content (and no additions, just salt and pepper) - not too lean - either
smashed thin or a bit thicker and medium/medium rare, processed cheese (it
really is the best on burgers, although swiss is nice too I guess), some kind
of "special sauce" (even if it's just ketchup and mayo), diced raw white
onion, dill pickle slices and lettuce.

Most places can't perfect the basics, but have some kind of truffle oil,
bacon, foie gras (I'm exaggerating for effect a bit here) monstrosity on the
menu to compensate.

------
wyldfire
I just learned this bit on the radio the other day and was quite surprised:
out of 1.9 billion acres in the US, the #1 and #3 ranked uses are cattle and
crops (respectively) [1]. Out of the crops, much of it is used for livestock.

[1] [https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731823/the-u-s-has-
nearly-...](https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731823/the-u-s-has-
nearly-1-9-billion-acres-of-land-heres-how-it-is-used)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
And _why_ is that land used for livestock? Much of this is land in the west,
and there's not much else you can do with it. You can't grow crops on it - not
enough water. You can't even grow trees on it - not much land got cleared of
trees to make room for grazing. All you can do is run some cows or sheep on
it. And, behold, it becomes part of this huge acreage used for cattle.

~~~
moreranchplease
Considerably more water is used to raise cattle than plants. And then the
plants that they feed on also need water.

~~~
TACIXAT
Efficiency isn't really an argument that is going to get people to change
their preferences. Case in point, Electron apps. Even if beef becomes the
Electron of the food world, you know a ton of people are still going to
consume it.

~~~
moreranchplease
You don't think water shortages will change people's preferences?

~~~
seisvelas
No. I live in Mexico City, where it is not unheard of for the government to
outright cut off the city water supply for days to account for shortages.

People's preferences haven't changed. Beef continues to be very popular, as do
public fountains. The choice not to consume meat (at least here) is mostly
associated with pretentious, upperclass people who like yoga and are keenly
interested in social justice (there is even a word for this type of person:
fresas, which literally means strawberries but here means, well, that type of
person).

Eating or not eating meat is more about adopting cultural, class, and identity
signifiers than any real correlation with the local water situation.

~~~
defterGoose
So what you're saying is that continuing your current beef consumption is a
neutral activity, while trying to cut back due to environmental impact is
simply virtue signalling? Maybe the people trying to cut back are ahead of the
curve. Maybe those people realize that if the worst effects of climate change
and population growth come to pass, that cutting back now could mean the
impact on beef supply in the future is mitigated. I guess, in that case, the
"unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga" would have those tree
huggers to thank.

Peoples' preference for war hasn't changed either (most people don't want it),
but we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you
can't go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of
scarcity of resources.

~~~
seisvelas
>is simply virtue signalling

No, more like life style participation.

>I guess, in that case, the "unpretentious, lower class people who hate yoga"
would have those tree huggers to thank.

We need many countries to make national-level policies about this. The
Instagram people are a smug drop in the bucket.

>we still find ourselves in conflict at every turn. That's because you can't
go too long without confronting the objective physical reality of scarcity of
resources.

That correlation seems made up. Has there been an increase of scarcity-driven
wars? Most wartorn places don't seem to be resource scarce.

------
hirundo
"Chipotle, Arby’s and Burger & Lobster are not jumping on the Beyond Meat and
Impossible Foods plant-based culinary movement ... We have spoken to those
folks and, unfortunately, it wouldn’t fit in our ‘food with integrity’
principals because of the processing, as I understand it, that it takes to
make a plant taste like a burger. ... Are they healthier as far as sodium,
calories and fat content? Definitely not ... Zarabi says processed foods,
whether they’re meatless or meat-containing, are never the healthiest choice."

[https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-some-restaurants-
are-t...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-some-restaurants-are-turning-
up-their-noses-at-beyond-meat-2019-07-29)

~~~
jessaustin
Arby's at least would require a _complete_ rebranding in order to sell this
stuff. _" We have the meats_^H^H^H^H _anufactured plant products! "_ (I'm not
familiar with B&L marketing but presumably they would be in a similar
position?) I can also understand Chipotle's point of view on this.

~~~
Junk_Collector
Didn't Arby's just recently release a "meat based vegetable" as part of their
marketing campaign.

~~~
jessaustin
I felt that the "Marrot" fit in perfectly with their other marketing.

------
omarhaneef
I think the part that rings clearly in my head is the ethical part. I really
cannot believe we eat animals. I know other animals do it all the time -- and
I don't hold it against tigers and lions -- but its still strange to me that
we, humans, do it.

If you don't feel that strong surprise, then I think the other arguments may
or may not work for you. But if you have that sense that it is strange and
perhaps off, then this article is heartening.

~~~
soperj
I feel the same way about vegetables. I know other animals do it all the time,
but when you add them up all the plant deaths are horrific.

~~~
moreranchplease
It is, unfortunately the majority of plants die at the hands of livestock. To
reduce the needless killing of plants, improve your health and the environment
is surprise.... to eat less or no meat.

~~~
soperj
>unfortunately the majority of plants die at the hands of livestock

Exactly, so if we kill the livestock and eat it, then less plants will suffer.

------
GlenTheMachine
On the one hand I’m very intrigued by this. It’s absolutely true that meat
production, and in particular beef production, has an enormous environmental
impact, so if this article is correct it could be huge.

But on the other hand I have some questions that I’ve not seen addressed. I’m
a small farmer. My wife and I raise sheep. Ruminants can be raised on land
that isn’t really productive. Maybe in some cases beef production is taking
away land that would be otherwise farmed, but in my experience that’s rare.
So, if we transition to plant-based meat, where does the farmland come from?
We’re already losing productive farmland at an incredible clip. If we suddenly
need to put millions of acres into new soybean or pea production, where does
it come from?

And second, at least in theory, mixed animal/crop production systems can be
closed loop. If done properly, with fallow periods and crop rotations, you
don’t need external agricultural fertilizer production. Granted, that’s not
the way most crops are produced _now_ , but a lot of us are arguing that it
should be - we should have local agriculture, with less centralization and
more intentional closed loop farming practices. If we really do go mostly to a
vegetarian diet, that possibility dries up. Agriculture becomes more and more
reliant on external chemical inputs. Small producers are even more
marginalized than they are today. Are we sure that’s what we want?

------
TACIXAT
I keep seeing articles like this, but saying something over and over again
does not make it true. I feel this could be proven by demand. While I'm sure
people who were already put off by meat are loving the availability of
meatless options, I do not see any meat eaters (in my life) who are lured to
the plant-based alternatives.

These alternative meats taste good with all the stuff you also associate with
hamburgers (bun, lettuce, tomato, onion, sauce), but on their own, they do not
come close to beef.

------
negzero7
I disagree with this piece; it seems like the author doesn't like beef in
general (which is fine) but I don't think most people will give up beef for
"alt meat". I think it will just be another option, not a replacement. And
sales still seem strong to me:
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/542890/beef-
consumption-...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/542890/beef-consumption-
us/)

------
Xcelerate
I don’t think most people will have a problem switching to plant based burgers
as long as they taste good, but I think that’s still the sticking point at the
moment. I’ve had an Impossible burger a few times and could always taste a
strong difference (I even did a few blind taste tests). I don’t think it’s
close to actual meat yet. Supposedly the second version of the burger has
improved; I haven’t tried it yet.

Cheap meat, like ground beef, will be replaced first, but I think it will be
much more difficult to replace specialty meats: Iberian ham or Wagyu for
instance. Good luck making something plant-based that tastes like that (not
saying it can’t be done though).

~~~
Junk_Collector
Even with Wagyu and Kobe, the whole cow isn't getting turned into premium cuts
of meat. Burger and sausage are going to be a byproduct of the parts that
aren't high margin proportional to the demand for the rest of it. Kind of like
how eggs are so cheap because they are a natural byproduct of the chicken meat
industry and the insatiable American lust for all white meat breast. I
wouldn't be surprised to see an effective advertising campaign to make burger
et al more "premium" as plant based substitutes take off and the price go up
as a result of that. Kind of how Angus cows got to be big in the first place.

~~~
Falling3
"Kind of like how eggs are so cheap because they are a natural byproduct of
the chicken meat industry [...]"

That has nothing to do with why eggs are cheap. Completely separate breeds are
raised for eggs vs meat. The birds used for meat are killed at only 6-7 weeks
typically. They never rarely if ever lay a single egg. Eggs are cheap because
layer hens have been bred to produce several times their natural number off
eggs combined with other practices like forced molting that increase
production. And those hens are killed after a couple of years to be used for
cheap meat. You have the subsidizing relationship backwards.

------
phunctional
Is nobody seriously going to talk about cellular agriculture/clean meat?
Companies like Memphis Meats, JUST, Finless Foods, etc. creating actual
beef/meat?

~~~
henrysarabia
I haven't read or heard of these but they sound interesting. I'd like to hear
what you have to say about them

------
formalsystem
I'm starting to think more and more that people promoting plant based burgers
have either never tasted beef or never tasted a plant based burger.

If the main concern is environment I get it and go for it. But if you are
claiming that plant based burgers are healthier or tastier you are borderline
delusional.

Last time I cooked a Beyond Meat burger I noticed it was 30% canola oil. 30%
CANOLA OIL, might as well just inject cholesterol and fast forward a heart
attack.

I still get nightmares when I think of how bad the flavor was, think of the
most processed food you possibly can like jolly ranchers and then imagine a
salty fatty version of it.

I legit don't understand how this trend keeps going even though vegetarian
burgers made with vegetables are delicious and way healthier and there are
alternative cuisines like Indian or Mediterranean that gives you loads of
options that aren't basically CANOLA OIL.

~~~
artimaeis
> Last time I cooked a Beyond Meat burger I noticed it was 30% canola oil. 30%
> CANOLA OIL, might as well just inject cholesterol and fast forward a heart
> attack.

Yes, the Beyond Meat burger does have a substantial amount of canola oil. But
what's this about cholesterol and heart attack risk? Canola oil is one of the
healthier oils - it's low in saturated fats and high in monounsaturated fats
which are shown to actually help fight heart disease. The amount of
cholesterol in a Beyond Meat or Impossible Burger is 0.

Let's compare that to even a lean burger (85/15): whose 4oz patty contains
102mg of cholesterol and a blend of saturated fats, trans fats,
monounsaturated fats, and polyunsaturated fats. It's terribly unhealthy, and
the risks associated with the consumption of red meat are well known.

The Mediterranean diet you promote also includes high amounts of
monounsaturated fats (Olive oil). If I've overlooked some other deep seated
risk associated to canola oil, let me know.

~~~
chrisco255
You made a couple of invalid claims here:

1) Canola oil is one of the healthier oils. 2) Monounsaturated fats help fight
heart disease. 3) Naturally occurring trans fat is the same as industrial
trans fat 4) Red meat has health risks

EDIT, included sources, with comments: [1] Canola oil may have dramatic
negative effect on weight gain and brain health: "Effect of canola oil
consumption on memory, synapse and neuropathology in the triple transgenic
mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease"
[https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17373-3?error=dat...](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17373-3?error=database_circuit_open&error_description=Database%20is%20temporarily%20unavailable)

[2] No clear benefits of MUFA-rich diets: "Monounsaturated Fatty Acids and
Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: Synopsis of the Evidence Available from
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses"
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3546618/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3546618/)

[3] High trans fat intake associated with lower sudden cardiac death: "Natural
trans fat, dairy fat, partially hydrogenated oils, and cardiometabolic health:
the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health Study"
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4816962/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4816962/)

[4] Claims on red meat risks that are limited to epidemiological studies
(surveys) that are unreliable, do not factor for confounding variables, and do
not conclusively prove anything. Keto diet, for example, has shown to lower
cardiovascular risk factors:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5452247/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5452247/)

~~~
drdrey
Red meat is classified as probably carcinogenic to humans by the WHO.

[https://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-
meat/en/](https://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/)

~~~
chrisco255
"This recommendation was based on epidemiological studies suggesting that
small increases in the risk of several cancers may be associated with high
consumption of red meat or processed meat."

Epidemiological studies are surveys. They are not scientific proof of
anything. This is an incredulous position to be taken by the WHO and makes me
seriously question their values. They state they are small increases of risk,
but do not even go into confounding variables inherent in surveys. True
science isolates a variable and proves that there is a causation. It does not
do so by correlation.

~~~
jdietrich
You just cited an epidemiological study and an evidence review based mainly on
epidemiological studies. What do you actually believe?

~~~
chrisco255
I believe that nutrition science is pretty dubious because it mainly relies on
epidemiological studies. The extraordinary claims that are touted as fact are
numerous. This is why we get many conflicting studies on cholesterol, fats,
carbs, etc. It's very, very difficult to isolate one variable in nutrition
epidemiological studies and attribute them to correlations in population
outcomes. The one major success story for epidemiological studies was smoking
and lung cancer. Of course, difference there is that smoking is binary: one
either smokes or they don't. They may smoke more or less...but the variables
are pretty low. Whereas dietary intake is diverse and no two people eat the
same exact diet.

------
monksy
This whole submarine vegan agenda is annoying. Yes, people will choose to go
with the artificial beef. No it's not going to replace beef. It's a subsitute.

A few things:

1\. Cows are not optimized to make meat: Animals aren't a food factory.
Animals eat other animals. We are animals and happen to have a wide variety of
what we can eat

2\. There are distinct benefits from eating meat (vitamins), in which it's
incredibly inefficient from getting them from plants

3\. The feedlots and environmental problems, that's an issue of our economy.
Theres a particular expectation on output.

4\. The impossible burger: The author is incredibly disingenuous about the
comparison. He is trying to claim that the burger has so many bad aspects but
completely ignores how ultra-processed the beyond burger is.

5\. The author is completely obsessed on cows. There are MANY more
alternatives to cows that you can eat.

~~~
dashundchen
In the article the author talks about eating both a beef burger and cheese, so
I don't think he has a "vegan agenda".

> 2\. There are distinct benefits from eating meat (vitamins), in which it's
> incredibly inefficient from getting them from plants

Raising meat with today's common production methods (feed lots) is incredibly
inefficient. In fact, a plant based diet can meet all nutritional requirements
with just B12 vitamins. Many vitamins and minerals in meat and dairy are there
because of supplementation, not because they're natural.

> 3\. The feedlots and environmental problems, that's an issue of our economy.
> Theres a particular expectation on output.

Which is why plant based diets, both processed foods like these burgers and
un/ lightly processed (beans, nuts, tofu and tempeh, pulses) are a solution.
They can be grown much more efficiently than meat and take a huge load off of
our environment and emissions.

> 5\. The author is completely obsessed on cows. There are MANY more
> alternatives to cows that you can eat.

Cows are also some of the worst animal agriculture product emissions wise and
a good chunk of the standard American diet. It's also definitely the star of
these fast food restaurants he discusses that these plant based meats are
aiming for.

~~~
monksy
> just B12 vitamins

Those require processing, and often times the supplement industry isn't
exactly that clean. (I'm looking at you cheap fish oil sups)

Also you should consider the efficency of what the equillence of plans would
take. (More plants requires more land+water, which requires more
infrastructure, more transportation, etc). Also, don't forget about soil
quality and erosion. You can't just grow infinitely on the same land. Let's
not forget yield loss due to pests and diease.

Cows are huge and they feed a lot of people with very little waste. (Assuming
you don't throw out the organs and bones)

\---

Overall, I would be interested in a thorough look at both sides per person.
Most of the articles I've seen from vegetarians and vegans have been
completely ignoring the logistics involved and overall impact.

~~~
moreranchplease
You should really look into this more. We already grow more than enough plants
to feed the world. The vast majority of them are fed to livestock. Just like
the vast majority of water is used for livestock. Just like the vast majority
of antibiotics are used for livestock. Just like the vast majority of land is
used for livestock.

~~~
nwallin
It's more complicated than that.

The fact that we grow more than enough food for the world and most people on
it go hungry is a political problem, not one related to food going to
livestock instead of starving children in Africa.

Places with water shortages don't grow animal fodder like corn (for beef) or
soy. (for pork) The Central Valley spends much more of its limited water
budget on almonds, walnuts, and pistachios than it does on cattle. There is
some corn grown in the central valley, but it's almost all sweet corn for
human consumption. Most animal fodder is grown in the Midwest and great planes
where they have plenty of water.

Sure, it takes a lot of animal fodder to get a relatively small amount of
beef, but you get significantly more animal fodder from one acre of land than
you do human food. Remember cattle eat the entire corn plant, stem and all;
they can digest cellulose, we can't. Humans either eat very small plants,
(lettuce, celery, asparagus) or they eat a tiny portion of the plant. (Fruit
or vegetables) Corn plants grow twelve feet tall and are densely packed
together.

There are numerous things we can and should do to improve the ranching
industry. Banning antibiotics for growth is step zero, antibiotic resident
disease is terrifying, and it trumps any and all concerns about food. Stopping
agricultural subsidies for corn is the next. Prices should reflect the true
cost, not the cost once you've subsidized the externalities. But these are
political problems, not intrinsic problems with meat.

------
carapace
> I knew it would keep getting better and beef wouldn’t.

> White Castle initially tested its Impossible Slider in just a few locations
> in New York, New Jersey, and Chicago in April 2018. It was such a hit that
> the company quickly expanded the program to all 380 outlets. “People are
> coming back for it again and again,” White Castle’s vice president, Jamie
> Richardson, said with a touch of astonishment.

> Resulting foot traffic was so strong that Burger King decided to serve the
> Impossible Whopper in all 7,200 restaurants, marking the moment when alt
> meat stopped being alt.

It reminds me of the joke, "I don't have to be faster than the _bear_ , just
faster than _you_."

------
AngeloAnolin
I’ve got a beef with this article.

I can probably only consider the end of the beef industry getting near when:

a. There are more people I see opting for the plant based food, instead of
beef;

b. When there’s really a shortage of cattle that produces or slaughtered as
beef.

There’s a moral aspect of eating plant based foods, but I cannot see anyone
transitioning easily from animal based meat products to select plant-based
foods as their main source of sustenance. It will take a lot of discipline,
willpower and of course, the availability (and affordability) of plant based
food products for someone considering the shift.

~~~
pcstl
There's also option c. which is: Someone figures out how to produce animal
tissue in a lab without requiring us to raise an entire animal and slaughter
it.

------
zeroimpl
I’ve tried these burgers and they are decent. But there are far better veggie
burgers out there that don’t try to resemble meat at all. For some reason fast
food companies stick with their garbage soy-based ones, so I’m happy to see
them at least get some better veggie options.

But for reference, quinoa burgers, chickpea burgers, mushroom burgers, black
bean burgers, sweet potato burgers, beet burgers - all taste great and are
more appealing for most vegetarians/vegans.

------
pcstl
While I am all for the end of the beef industry, I don't think it's happening
until we get actual synthetic lab-produced animal tissue.

It's great that we have companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible working on
this - this is the work that will eventually lead to the meat industry going
away for good, or at least becoming a niche industry - but until we can
synthesize _actual meat_ many people will hold out.

~~~
rsj_hn
There is already a technology for turning plants into burgers -- Cows. It's
time tested, natural, and requires only dry land and a bit of evolution. Also
tastes great!

If you have a problem with the beef industry, you can deal with it like all
the other problems with other industries, from financials to pharmaceutical.
You regulate the industry.

------
tailrecursion
Has Nina Teicholz's book been debunked? I see comments here that appear to
assume that these meat substitutes (Beyond Meat) are more healthy than beef --
is that really true? Animal meat is scientifically reported to be extremely
nutritious compared to plants, and dietary fat has been a main part of diets
around the world and continues to be so in e.g. French cuisine.

------
StacyC
After five years on a ketogenic diet (low carb, higher fat) I now eat mostly
fatty meat and eggs, and little else. I have never felt better or been in
better health.

This is anecdote, but a growing number of people are discovering the same
thing. Beef is great food. It will not go away.

~~~
artimaeis
The Beyond Burger only contains 3g of carbs, making it perfectly acceptable
for a Ketogenic diet, as far as I understand it. The Impossible burger
contains more, at 9g, but that's easy to fit into most carb allowences of Keto
(not many go for <10g/day).

Even with a goal of 0g of carbs per day there's a lot of room on the plate for
above-ground vegetables and natural oils.

Beef is an okay food, but there's lots of alternatives that seem to outperform
it for many metrics.

~~~
urban_strike
There's a lot more to achieving good health than macronutrient ratios.

The plant-alternatives both 1) lack the abundant, bioavailable nutrients found
in animal products and 2) include a lot of highly-processed and inflammatory
ingredients like seed oils.

And I think you're underselling beef by calling it an "okay" food. The meat we
get from cows and other ruminants (and particularly organ meats like liver)
are among THE most nutrient-dense and bioavilable foods available to humans.

------
purplezooey
I have a middle-aged uncle who _just_ got a cell phone. Beef'll be around for
a while.

------
codesushi42
Nope.

Last time I checked, not all beef is consumed as hamburgers.

The alt meat craze (if there is one) is due to the novelty factor. The
interest will decline over time.

That said, what does a raw Impossible Burger taste like? A raw hamburger?

Imagine wolfing down a raw one in front of a group of unknowing and terrified
onlookers.

~~~
artimaeis
> Last time I checked, not all beef is consumed as hamburgers.

The author of the article explicitly mentions using Impossible Burger for non-
hamburger applications:

"It looked identical to ground beef, so that’s how I treated it. And that’s
how it performed. I made sliders, kebabs, nachos, chili, Bolognese sauce, even
a little tartare (note: the company frowns hard on this)."

~~~
codesushi42
Not all beef is consumed as ground beef. Happy?

~~~
zeroimpl
The author mentions that 60% of it is...

~~~
codesushi42
When did 60% become the entire beef industry?

~~~
zeroimpl
Nobody said it would go away 100%. But it may become a niche product, like
foie gras.

~~~
codesushi42
Did you RTFA article? It is titled "The Beginning of the End of the Beef
Industry"!

~~~
zeroimpl
lol sounds like you only read the headline. But even if the beef industry
dies, that doesn’t mean beef itself is gone - there will certainly be non-
industrial producers.

------
WheelsAtLarge
I keep on reading that as the standard of living increases around the world
the amount of beef consumed increases. It's too early to call peak beef but
it's bound to happen if only because the amount of available resources to
produce it will decrease. But I suspect that it won't happen during any of our
lifetimes.

------
morning_breeze
What about milk? The milk industry produces beef as a byproduct. Cows have to
calve regularly to produce milk and eventually became beef themselves. In my
country McDonalds and other burger producers are the biggest buyers of old
milk cows. Their beef might be not good enough for steaks, but still good
enough for burgers.

~~~
zeroimpl
Nut-based milks are a great alternative. Though just like veggie burgers,
there are good and bad nut milks - look for ones without tons of additives.
They are also trivial to make yourself.

------
docker_up
I had a Beyond Meat burger recently. It was pretty good, about as good as a
below-average to average burger, but more tender. Overall, if this is all they
served at the cafeteria, it would be okay.

That said, it wasn't nearly good enough for me to buy instead of meat. Maybe
the day will come where it will be, but definitely not yet.

------
cassianoleal
I don't think Beyond Meat or any of the other beggie burgers will replace a
good cut of Fraldinha, Vazio, Picanha, Ribs, T-bone, etc any time soon.

In Brazil we eat that - proper beef from real cows grown on grass. Burgers are
seen as what they are - fatty fast food. Actual meat is something else
entirely.

------
CaliforniaKarl
On one of the podcasts I listen to (The Morning Stream), one of the co-hosts
(Brian) has been on Weight Watchers for I think all of this year. One thing he
has noted is that, assuming all else is equal (bun, toppings, etc.), an
Impossible or Beyond burger costs many more 'points' than a regular beef
burger. (One of the goals being to stay below a particular points limit each
day.) That surprised me, until he explained that the plant-based burger is
high in carbohydrates, which contributes to its high points value.

So I disagree that this is the end of an industry. I think it's the beginning
of change in an industry, but not its end.

------
frostyj
I don't know if the statement on price is valid in this article. For me, while
shopping in wholefoods, I found the price of beyond meat patties is almost
doubled than other, actual meat, brands. I am not sure why it is so expensive,
but I sincerely hope it is not the cost of production

~~~
technotony
Have a look at their IPO prospectus. Until they built their plant in 2018 they
were selling at below COGS. But this is mostly a scale problem, which is why
the stock is still performing well, as they are growing so fast the market is
confident they will fix the cost problem over time.

------
papito
I am going to stick with bison, thank you!

~~~
rsj_hn
How is bison? I had a bison burger once and didn't care for it, but maybe a
steak cut is better?

~~~
papito
Bison is a much healthier meat. It has less fat, and is loaded with protein.
Also, ALL bison is organic due to regulations.

------
magwa101
Too many carbs.

------
jpmcglone
I eat beef all day every day. It's good for you.

------
jpmcglone
I eat beef all day every day. It's great for you.

~~~
buckthundaz
As do I! Long live beef!!!

------
WaitWaitWha
um... "The California-based company said net loss widened to $6.6 million in
the three months ended March 30, from $5.7 million a year earlier. First-
quarter net revenue came in at $40.2 million, an increase of 215%, the company
said. Analysts had expected revenue of $38.9 million." \- reuters.

I may be cynic, but that is not sound good. If your net losses outpace your
net revenue, no matter how good that meat is, you are not going to make it.

And, why did the share prices (BYND) fall since July 26? Someone exiting?

There is no such thing as "alt meat". Is a bicycle alt SUV? Or alt vacation
for extra work hours? alt paycheck is a sub sandwich?

What is the point of trying to match what you are trying to eradicate?

So, where is the beef?

~~~
jessaustin
Eventually one of the two companies will survive by raising prices
drastically. Until then it's a VC-powered burn-rate battle...

------
sbooher
Pea protein isolates, rice protein, mung bean protein, canola oil etc are Not
food. I would not feed this to my dog. In fact, lined up against a bag of
cheap dog food, you might pick the dog food... In a world awash in heavily-
processed food, we now add this to the mix and get excited about it.

Statements about how "inefficient" cows are in making meat re calories
ingested, usually fail to mention that for most of the cow's life they are
eating grass on a range, which is not used for anything else. We didn't need
to make that grass, it's sitting there. Statements on the use on land assume
we would have condos and coffee shops sitting there, but for the cows on it.

~~~
dreamcompiler
Less than 3% of cattle wander around eating wild grass. Most cattle are fed
grains, grass, and alfalfa that was farmed on purpose as cattle feed. If
cattle didn't need the grass, the farmer would be growing human food on that
land.

~~~
mythrwy
I'd be interested in seeing a source for that less than 3% number.

However most cattle are certainly finished on grain without a doubt. Grain
that could possibly put to better uses (or not grown and save the fuel and
water).

~~~
dreamcompiler
TFA said it: "America gets 97 percent of its beef from feedlots."

Here's another one:

[https://www.reference.com/pets-animals/cows-
eat-a677816334f1...](https://www.reference.com/pets-animals/cows-
eat-a677816334f16804)

~~~
mythrwy
So they go through the feedlots but most cattle are not in the feedlot at once
(feedlots are a smaller part of the time a cow is alive, some months only).

The largest number of cattle, currently, if you counted them all up, are still
on pasture.

Not that this detracts from your point, mostly a minor semantic quibble.

~~~
urban_strike
I think it's a pretty huge point that's overlooked, not just a quibble.

If a group of kids were fed healthy, home-made meals all week and then get a
piece of chocolate cake on Sunday night, it's clearly misleading to say "100%
of these children were raised on chocolate cake!".

