Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat's plant-based burgers aren't healthier

https://www.businessinsider.com/beyond-burger-vs-impossible-burger-vs-fast-food-burger-nutrition-2019-6

by SirLJ • 7 years ago

73 103 7 years ago

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.

anreekoh2• 7 years ago

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.

qyv2• 7 years ago

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.

anreekoh2• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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...

nextstep• 7 years ago

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_2• 7 years ago

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.

xgulfie3• 7 years ago

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.

CarVac• 7 years ago

You don't mine nitrogen, you mine phosphorus.

lprubin2• 7 years ago

I had never heard that animal corpses were used in a large scale industrial farming fertilizer so I just looked through the most common soil fertilizers, at least in the U.S. I don't believe a single one of them uses animal corpses.

It seems that the common types of fertilizer[1] are:

- anhydrous ammonia (Nitrogen pulled from the air[2])

- urea ammonium nitrate (Nitrogen pulled from natural gas and plants[3])

- granular urea (Nitrogen pulled from natural gas and plants[3])

- ammonium nitrate (Nitrogen from mixing ammonia [5] and and synthesized nitric acid [4])

- diammonium phosphate (Nitrogen from ammonia and phosphoric acid [6])

You may be correct that small farmers use animal corpses, and you may be correct that using artificial nitrogen is bad for the soil, but 97-99% of the plant foods grown in the U.S. appear to use non-animal based fertilizers. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong about the science of this.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-explosion-ammonia/fac...

[2] http://www.greenvalleychemical.com/Green_Valley_Chemical/Anh...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea#Production

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonium_nitrate#Production

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia_production

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diammonium_phosphate

CJefferson2• 7 years ago

Vegans aren't stupid -- but the difference in animal suffering from a meat heavy diet and a meat free diet is massive. Just because something can't be done 100% today, doesn't mean it isn't worth achieving 95% success.

captainredbeard4• 7 years ago

Joel Salatin, perhaps?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Salatin

selectodude2• 7 years ago

It used to be mined, now essentially 100 percent of the ammonium nitrate used in fertilizer and explosives is synthetic. It's made by reacting ammonia with nitric acid.

captainredbeard4• 7 years ago

If you let ruminant livestock graze in a carefully managed pattern instead of feeding them grain (grown and transported from miles away), it improves the land and reduces the amount of pollution:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI

Cattle are not very efficient at converting grain to protein. It’s about 7:1. Pork is 2:1, in comparison. Poultry is close to 1:1.

lozenge• 7 years ago

If all livestock were raised in this way there would be nowhere near enough of them to feed current demand for meat (not saying that's a bad thing).

Allan Savory holds a very fringe view not supported by scientists in this field, which you wouldn't know from his TED talk.

bjoli• 7 years ago

Don't forget that not all lands are good carbon sinks. The Swedish department of agriculture claimed in a report (nr 25:2010 iirc. In Swedish ) that the vast majority of Swedish grazeland would not meaningfully decrease carbon emissions regardless of grazing systems

sdfasdfasdfsdfw• 7 years ago

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.

dr_dshiv• 7 years ago

"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

aitchnyu2• 7 years ago

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.

xipho• 7 years ago

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.

bambax• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

gpvos2• 7 years ago

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.)

leot• 7 years ago

Excellent example of strawman click-bait:

1 take a newsy subject involving something many people like 2 choose an aspect of it about which to adopt the "sober skeptic" stance 3 write the article as though this aspect is the only part of the newsy subject that's worth discussing

The move made in 3 is the trick. It's at least disingenuous, and may even be cynically mercenary.

psychometry• 7 years ago

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

gwd• 7 years ago

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."

MisterBastahrd• 7 years ago

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.

mark_l_watson• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

doitLP• 7 years ago

Human-centric worldview and “only humans have souls” goes back to the dawn of recorded history. We often lived in closer confines with animals, often sleeping together for warmth, protection and to watch for predators.

However killing animals for food was the way humans stayed alive when food was scarce as we pushed further into habitats that weren’t temperate.

If anything I guess that the “only humans have souls” story arose as a necessary psychological protection mechanism for people who raised and got to know their animals and then had to slaughter and eat them. Same way people also try to dehumanize the enemy in war in order to not be crushed by the knowledge of killing another human being.

Then once we stopped spending so much time with animals it was easy to continue the narrative since we don’t spend time observing them close up anymore and getting to know them personally.

qyv2• 7 years ago

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.

javagram• 7 years ago

FWIW, the Greek philosophy of Aristotle adopted by Christians later on said that souls existed in vegetables, animals, and in humans.

Christians added to that the idea that the human soul was immortal and could survive the destruction of the body.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1075.htm#article3

I think any philosophizing about souls probably came long after humans began hunting for meat to survive.

greendestiny_re• 7 years ago

There is no indication dietary cholesterol impacts blood cholesterol. Watch Dr. Robert Lustig's "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" for more on the subject.

ubercow13• 7 years ago

Doesn't diatary cholesterol not matter for most people?

52-6F-62• 7 years ago

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.

alkonaut• 7 years ago

Reasons I’d eat (more) vegetarian

1. Climate

2. Ethics

...

10. Nutrition/Health

hallihax10• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

hallihax10• 7 years ago

I'm guilty myself - my city has exploded with vegan stuff over the last couple of years and my waistline has expanded in-line with it :P

seandougall• 7 years ago

Some sugar is vegan. Most isn’t, though most vegans I know conveniently ignore that: [1]

[1] https://www.peta.org/living/food/is-sugar-vegan/

selectodude2• 7 years ago

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

chr14• 7 years ago

Sure vegan burgers have their target market, but if they were healthy in addition to being vegan they would appeal to a larger market.

hallihax10• 7 years ago

This is true of non-vegan burgers too, surely?

leguminous• 7 years ago

There are vegetarian/vegan burgers available with fewer calories, often containing more beans or vegetables. They've been available for longer than the Impossible or Beyond burgers without gaining nearly as much public mindshare. A random example sold at my local grocery store:

http://drpraegers.com/our-food/california-veggie-burgers/ Ingredients: Carrots, Onions, String Beans, Oat Bran, Soybeans, Zucchini, Expeller Pressed Canola Oil, Peas, Broccoli, Corn, Soy Flour, Spinach, Red Peppers, Arrowroot Powder, Corn Starch, Garlic, Corn Meal, Sea Salt, Spices

They don't taste or feel like burgers, though. It seems that the products that taste like burgers (which require more fat and won't accommodate stuff like carrots and broccoli) are the ones that appeal to a larger market.

endymi0n• 7 years ago

„In a related study, the same authors found that electric cars on average are not any faster than petrol based cars.“

hallihax10• 7 years ago

On average, in cities like London, driving is more or less the same speed as walking.

vibrato5• 7 years ago

I eat burgers for my health. Often with no bun or fries. The more of my calories come from beef, the better I feel.

hallihax10• 7 years ago

Feels != facts

notacoward2• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

notacoward2• 7 years ago

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

dymk2• 7 years ago

The article provides no source for the “most consumers” claim. Journalists aren’t immune to making stuff up. Why would you blindly trust it?

bane• 7 years ago

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.

scriptproof• 7 years ago

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.

dpflan• 7 years ago

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.

deboflo• 7 years ago

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.

elcritch• 7 years ago

Link?

klez• 7 years ago

Then please flag it and move on.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

chris_wot• 7 years ago

Perhaps, but I think you might be going a bit overboard. However, I would like to see the original study data, and who commissioned it.

That said, perhaps it does make sense that there is too much sodium. This sort of thing should be listed on ingredients, but I don't know what laws there are in the U.S. about this sort of thing.

elil172• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

elil172• 7 years ago

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.

peterwwillis• 7 years ago

Oh. They have some extra salt.

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

segmondy• 7 years ago

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.

newscracker• 7 years ago

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.

tmaly• 7 years ago

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

Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat's plant-based burgers aren't healthier

Related Stories