The Impossible Burger 2.0

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 1:43am #1

If Bill Gates has his way all live stock farmers could be in trouble, the mission is to remove animals from the food chain by 2035. He's impossible brand is about to launch a steak and the impossible burger 2.0 was one of the stars of CES 2019 last month it won Engadget’s “Most Unexpected Product,” “Most Impactful Product,” and “Best of the Best”.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidebanis/2019/01/11/the-new-impossible-burger-2-0-won-everyones-mouth-at-ces-2019-but-thats-just-the-beginning/#457fab1227c4

_Brian · 21-02-2019 9:19am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If Bill Gates has his way all live stock farmers could be in trouble, the mission is to remove animals from the food chain by 2035. He's impossible brand is about to launch a steak and the impossible burger 2.0 was one of the stars of CES 2019 last month it won Engadget’s “Most Unexpected Product,” “Most Impactful Product,” and “Best of the Best”.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidebanis/2019/01/11/the-new-impossible-burger-2-0-won-everyones-mouth-at-ces-2019-but-thats-just-the-beginning/#457fab1227c4

This just a vegans wet dream.

Vast amounts of chemicals and power replied it’s actually worse for the environment than pasture reared beef.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 11:38am

_Brian wrote: »

This just a vegans wet dream.

Vast amounts of chemicals and power replied it’s actually worse for the environment than pasture reared beef.

It's not worse for the environment, uses a fraction of the resources. I'm not a vegetarian but the new 2.0. Burger looks good nobody could tell it wasn't beef. It can be used in the same way beef is.
The guys behind this aren't lightweights bill gates and the former CEO of MC Donald's. These and beyond burgers are in thousands of restraunts already and the impossible burger is hitting super markets in the US in the next few weeks.
I'd like to try it just to cut down on the amount of meat I eat, the old one was meant to be a bit like sawdust but not this one it even bleeds.

gozunda · 21-02-2019 12:03pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's not worse for the environment, uses a fraction of the resources. I'm not a vegetarian but the new 2.0. Burger looks good nobody could tell it wasn't beef. It can be used in the same way beef is.
The guys behind this aren't lightweights bill gates and the former CEO of MC Donald's. These and beyond burgers are in thousands of restraunts already and the impossible burger is hitting super markets in the US in the next few weeks. I'd like to try it just to cut down on the amount of meat I eat, the old one was meant to be a bit like sawdust but not this one it even bleeds.

Hate to burst the bubble but I tried one of those ' Beyond Burgers' at a friend's house as I'll try anything at least once! Wasn't impressed tbh. The first thing that struck me was taste - it was neither a 'veggie' burger or a 'meat' burger. Wouldn't bother trying it again tbh.

But what really put me off was the ingredient list. It's mainly just highly procesed junk imo.

Water, Pea Protein Isolate* (18%), Rapeseed Oil, Coconut Oil, Flavouring, Smoke Flavouring, Stabilisers - Cellulose, Methylcellulose, Gum Arabic, Potato Starch, Maltodextrin, Yeast Extract, Salt, Sunflower Oil, Dried Yeast, Antioxidants - Ascorbic Acid, Acetic Acid, Colour - Beetroot Red, Modified Corn Starch, Apple Extract, Lemon Juice Concentrate,

Link to image of packaging - zoom in to see detail.
https://i.imgur.com/eoExYcs.jpg

Also noted the 'burgers' were "packed in the UK using ...Patties from the USA" that's more air miles than aer lingus.

Yeah its backed by big money - but tbh investment whores like that will put their money in anything which will make a tidy profit especially where the hype is it's a product made out to be 'healthy' or 'good'for the environment and all the hipsters are falling over themselves to look more with it than the other eejits.

So no not 'good' for the enviroment by any stretch of the imagination. Importing junk food when we can source sustainable beef produced to high standards from our own fields is a laugh tbh ...

Here's an interesting article about the "impossible burger"

https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18498-a-misguided-experiment

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 12:35pm

gozunda wrote: »

Hate to burst the bubble but I tried one of those ' Beyond Burgers' at a friend's house as I'll try anything at least once! Wasn't impressed tbh.

Here's an interesting article about the "impossible burger"

https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18498-a-misguided-experiment

Talking about the impossible burger 2.0 not the old impossible burger or beyond burgers.
Different ingredients to the article your linked to.
If they nail the texture, taste, smell and versatility of beef it's possible consumers will switch especially if it's cheaper and they can't tell the difference.
The steak is on the way and chicken, fish, pork etc.

I'm not in away anti beef but I look the look of that burger and the reviews all agree you can't tell the difference.
The world does need an alternative to meat that's exactly like meat.

gozunda · 21-02-2019 1:47pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Talking about the impossible burger 2.0 not the old impossible burger or beyond burgers.
Different ingredients to the article your linked to.
If they nail the texture, taste, smell and versatility of beef it's possible consumers will switch especially if it's cheaper and they can't tell the difference. The steak is on the way and chicken, fish, pork etc.
I'm not in away anti beef but I look the look of that burger and the reviews all agree you can't tell the difference. The world does need an alternative to meat that's exactly like meat.

Oh would ya fek away off with rubbish that's sounding like the promotions unit for "impossible burger inc"

Afaik the controversial genetically modified stuff detailed in the article linked is in all those products you listed.

The world needs an alternative to meat like we needed an alternative to butter back in the 1970s when they came up highly processed hydrogenated fat glulp. Interestingly one of the many alternatives to butter 'I cant believe it's not putter" and do you know what I couldn't believe that anyone would be fooled into thinking that somehow that stuff was the same as butter. Well it wasn't. It is interesting that years later some of these products have been shown to be downright harmful.

We do have an alternative to meat - its called vegetables. But hey nothing like pushing mass produced junk food and flying it around the world as pushed by mega corporations looking to make a buck.

The single biggest environmental issue at this time is transport and the use of fossil fuels. If you really want to make a huge difference then cut down on your use of transport and fossil fuels and imported foods and forget about flying off each year for a holiday abroad - as a single transatlantic flight will cause more damage to the environment than eating locally produced meat or dairy products for a year.

And dont believe everything big business tells you ..

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/margarine-no-longer-melting-in-quite-so-many-mouths-1.3043672

_Brian · 21-02-2019 2:18pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's not worse for the environment, .

https://www.technologyreview.com/the-download/612990/lab-grown-meat-could-be-worse-for-the-environment-than-beef/

Experts from MIT and Oxford University seem to be disagreeing with you on this. Cattle farming is suffering a disproportionate bad press because of failed methods of balancing emissions against sequestering, then this issue is sorted indoibt lab grown “food” (not meat) will fair even worse.

This nothing more but an industry trying to hack into the vegan train and industrialise food production without dirty farmers and farming getting in the way.

Who on earth thinks chemically grown food is more preferable than traditionally produced food, humans are doomed if we become bamboozled by stuff like this because some rich bloke is recommending it, so he can make money of it. .

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 2:28pm

That's lab gown meat a different thing entirely. This isn't pitched at vegans.
Your kinda being a bit too dismissive of it, could go as far as saying you think it's impossible.

_Brian · 21-02-2019 2:40pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That's lab gown meat a different thing entirely. This isn't pitched at vegans.
Your kinda being a bit too dismissive of it, could go as far as saying you think it's impossible.

Just to be absolutely clear.

I’m completely dismissing the environmental and moral stance on lab grown food. It’s been long long proven that the more artificial processing that is done to our food the less nutritious it becomes and the less healthy people are as a result of eating it.

Make no mistake that commercial entities are into this as it gives them complete control over food.

Our fruit and veg should come from farms as close to where we live, we should be buying it fresh and cooking it ourselves from its original form.

Our meat should be farmed locally, killed locally and as much as possible we should be buying it as cuts of meat. Butchers will mince a cut of meat on the spot. Of most butchers make burgers etc on site.

Mass production and lab growing food is bad for humans but really good for business. It’s bad for the environment, much worse that traditional farming methods.

In the same breath I think feedlots for beef should be banned because of the commercial nature of the production it supports.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 2:57pm

I hear you and I'd agree with most of it. This isn't lab grown meat though which you keep going back to, if you had of asked me a month ago I'd say the same as you but after seeing how this is made as opposed to people trying to grow meat it looks like there on to something.
The first burger you knew it wasn't a burger this 2.0 version you don't know and it doesn't have anywhere near the impact of standard beef.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63FHZy_7-qs

TITANIUM. · 21-02-2019 3:11pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I hear you and I'd agree with most of it. This isn't lab grown meat though which you keep going back to, if you had of asked me a month ago I'd say the same as you but after seeing how this is made as opposed to people trying to grow meat it looks like there on to something.
The first burger you knew it wasn't a burger this 2.0 version you don't know and it doesn't have anywhere near the impact of standard beef.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63FHZy_7-qs

and all confirmed by that totally legitimate serious reporter at the end. I'm sold! where can I get some???

patsy_mccabe · 21-02-2019 3:21pm

I've heard the Impossible Burger is delicious. Apparently the Ascorbic Acid and Acetic Acid give an amazing aftertaste.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 3:21pm

TITANIUM. wrote: »

and all confirmed by that totally legitimate serious reporter at the end. I'm sold! where can I get some???

Ah come.on this scooped loads or awards at CES a few weeks ago. Bill Gates is funding it. He hasn't been after profit for years.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 3:24pm

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

I've heard the Impossible Burger is delicious. Apparently the Ascorbic Acid and Acetic Acid give an amazing aftertaste.

Like sawdust apparently, the 2.0 version was just released you haven't tried it. You had the same as Jeremy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3opRTD6nHWg

_Brian · 21-02-2019 4:33pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Ah come.on this scooped loads or awards at CES a few weeks ago. Bill Gates is funding it. He hasn't been after profit for years.

You’ve probably noticed I’ve a pure destabilise for excessively processed foods, this would definitely be in that classification of um necessary food.

Constantly saying it Must be great because Bill Gates is involved means nothing amd of anything is a negative for me.

Also, is CES not a technology thing, hardly a ground for food awards.

I’d rarely eat a burger, and they are nearly all produced at local butcher where I slaw local farmers bringing in heifers for slaughter behind the shop.

gozunda · 21-02-2019 5:31pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Ah come.on this scooped loads or awards at CES a few weeks ago. Bill Gates is funding it. He hasn't been after profit for years.

Why in the name of God would anyone promote a product made in the US and packaged in the UK as something better than locally sourced high quality meat?

I dont care if the Pope is pushing it ( though apparently some other corporation flogging plant based products are trying to corner the marketing potential of the Vatican at al). Corporations have no ones welfare in mind
We are being sold highly processed crap riding on the back of an anti-animal agriculture agenda.

And I notice the 'new' recipe has soy protein instead of wheat protein. Oh joy for the worlds rainforests....

Here's some interesting reading about who is pushing this type of ****e and why

https://www.mouthymoney.co.uk/how-vegan-evangelists-are-propping-up-the-ultra-processed-food-industry/

More about the other current product 'beyond burger'

https://ancestral-nutrition.com/beyond-meat-is-beyond-unhealthy/

Rory28 · 21-02-2019 5:40pm

The impossible burger 2.0 sounds like a great idea but what happens to all the cattle if we just switch to artificial beef?

Slaughter them all or let them loose?

gozunda · 21-02-2019 5:50pm

Topic was moved to it's own thread

So the comment which was here is kinda redundant

...

_Brian · 21-02-2019 6:32pm

We need to be pushing people back to basics of, local produce, food prep and home cooking.
There is a serious addenda that ANYTHING non animal based is better. This simply isn’t true, it’s an outright lie but it’s being pushed by the extreme vegan brigade on one side and massive corporations on the other.

_Brian · 21-02-2019 6:35pm

Rory28 wrote: »

The impossible burger 2.0 sounds like a great idea but what happens to all the cattle if we just switch to artificial beef?

Slaughter them all or let them loose?

It sounds like a terrible idea, more overprocessed muck full of salt, sugar and god knows what list of ingredients, this is the rubbish killing people while pretending to be a “healthy” “ethical” alternative to meat.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 6:52pm

What's in the local butcher's burgers 4 for €5 that are delivered in the back of a transit? There must be additives and fillers.

Here's the impossible burger.

Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose, Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12

I don't see any Sugar there, and I don't think you can talk about meat without salt, what's the saying when cooking, when you think you've used enough salt add some more. It's the way I cook anyway.

Say my name · 21-02-2019 8:08pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What's in the local butcher's burgers 4 for €5 that are delivered in the back of a transit? There must be additives and fillers.

Here's the impossible burger.

Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose, Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12

I don't see any Sugar there, and I don't think you can talk about meat without salt, what's the saying when cooking, when you think you've used enough salt add some more. It's the way I cook anyway.

Methylcellulose = Wallpaper paste.

With all that tinkering before you even eat the thing doesn't make that "food" very appealing.

_Brian · 21-02-2019 8:14pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What's in the local butcher's burgers 4 for €5 that are delivered in the back of a transit? There must be additives and fillers.

Here's the impossible burger.

Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose, Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12

I don't see any Sugar there, and I don't think you can talk about meat without salt, what's the saying when cooking, when you think you've used enough salt add some more. It's the way I cook anyway.

Never be convinced these are anything but overprocessed muck, like lots of burgers.
99% of the meat we eat is cuts of meat.

Processed foods like the one your recommending are bad for people’s health. Lots of stuff added to make it palatable doesn’t mean it’s good for you.

The reliance on super processed foods is a sad development, we’ve lost so much of our food culture if people think processed foods are acceptable

Buford T. Justice XIX · 21-02-2019 8:46pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What's in the local butcher's burgers 4 for €5 that are delivered in the back of a transit? There must be additives and fillers.

Here's the impossible burger.

Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose, Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12

I don't see any Sugar there, and I don't think you can talk about meat without salt, what's the saying when cooking, when you think you've used enough salt add some more. It's the way I cook anyway.

Here's what's in my burger that I just had for supper.

Water, porridge, minced meat from a heifer killed last summer.

Significantly shorter ingredient list there, I'm sure you'll agree.

And bloody (pun intended) delicious.

_Brian · 21-02-2019 8:58pm

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Here's what's in my burger that I just had for supper.

Water, porridge, minced meat from a heifer killed last summer.

Significantly shorter ingredient list there, I'm sure you'll agree.

And bloody (pun intended) delicious.

Now THAT is a burger worthy of a fellas time. Mr Microsoft can eff off with his real d pretend foods.

It’s betrer for the environment, better for the humans and doesn’t line the pockets of big business.

gozunda · 21-02-2019 9:37pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What's in the local butcher's burgers 4 for €5 that are delivered in the back of a transit? There must be additives and fillers.
Here's the impossible burger.
Water, Soy Protein Concentrate, Coconut Oil, Sunflower Oil, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Potato Protein, Methylcellulose, Yeast Extract, Cultured Dextrose,* Food Starch Modified, Soy Leghemoglobin**, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Mixed Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Zinc Gluconate, Thiamine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B1), Sodium Ascorbate (Vitamin C), Niacin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12I don't see any Sugar there, and I don't think you can talk about meat without salt, what's the saying when cooking, when you think you've used enough salt add some more. It's the way I cook anyway.

Drunk monkey for someone claiming to be neither veg*n thats a helluva lot of pushing for a particular product (btw and I'm not saying you are) And I gather you haven't even tasted one yet?????

As to your white van scenario - What if the Michael D Higgins is the Pope? My local butcher makes his own burgers on the premises - you can watch him make them and he will stand over their quality.

The impossible burger not only contains a mixture of highly processed additives and Soy - it also contains a controversial genetically modified ingredient** which interestingly you've not called out in the Ingredient list above but is discussed on their website where they gloss over much of the relevant issues. I posted the link to this earlier. Perhaps you had better read that first? .

Btw this product has to be flown half way around the world to get here. Its made from Soy - a product not without it's own controversies regarding herbicide use and the destruction of forests and your still pushing it?

I have to ask Why?

*Dextrose is an processed sweetener (sugar) derived from corn btw

**Soy leghemoglobin (SLH), a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast.

See: https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18498-a-misguided-experiment

Dakota Dan · 21-02-2019 10:14pm

gozunda wrote: »

Drunk monkey for someone claiming to be neither vegan nor vegetarian thats a helluva lot of pushing for a particular product (btw and I'm not saying you are) And I gather you haven't even tasted one yet?????

As to your white van scenario - What if the Michael D Higgins is the Pope? My local butcher makes his own burgers on the premises - you can watch him make them and he will stand over their quality.

The impossible burger not only contains a mixture of highly processed additives and Soy - it also contains a controversial genetically modified ingredient** which interestingly you've not called out in the Ingredient list above but is discussed on their website where they gloss over much of the relevant issues. I posted the link to this earlier. Perhaps you had better read that first? .

Btw this product has to be flown half way around the world to get here. Its made from Soy - a product not without it's own controversies regarding herbicide use and the destruction of forests and your still pushing it?

I have to ask Why?

*Dextrose is an processed sweetener (sugar) derived from corn btw

**Soy leghemoglobin (SLH), a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast.

See: https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18498-a-misguided-experiment

He’s probably a closet vegan

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 10:22pm

That ingredient your referring to Heme? The one pumping oxygen around your blood? Bad for you? Not likely.

I'm not pushing it but I can see where it has a place in the food chain. It's been completely dismissed here for not factually accurate reason though.

A lot seems of the debate seems to be about how bad it is for you and the environment. Meat production isn't exactly the best thing for the environment ether. We use plants to make animals into meat, making plants into meat is a lot more sustainable.

As for nutrition..

The 2.0

Nutrition Facts
Serving size4 oz. (113g)

Amount per serving
Calories240
% Daily Value*
Total Fat14g 18%
Saturated Fat8g 40%
Trans Fat0g
Cholesterol0mg 0%
Sodium370mg 16%
Total Carbohydrate9g 3%
Dietary Fiber3g 11%
Total Sugars<1g
Includes<1g Added Sugars 1%
Protein19g 31%
Vitamin D0mcg 0%
Calcium170mg 15%
Iron4.2mg 25%
Potassium610mg 15%
Thiamin28.2mg 2350%
Riboflavin0.4mg 30%
Niacin5.3mg 35%
Vitamin B60.4mg 25%
Folate115mcg DFE 30%
Vitamin B123mcg 130%
Phosphorus180mg 15%
Zinc5.5mg 50%
* The % Daily Value tells you how much a nutrient in a serving of food contributes to a daily diet. 2,000 calories a day is used for general nutrition advice.

Standard burger

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size:
1
burger (113g grams)
Amount Per Serving
Calories from Fat 153
Calories 240
% Daily Value*
26%Total Fat 17g grams
35% Saturated Fat 7g grams
Trans Fat 1g grams
28%Cholesterol 85mg milligrams
4%Sodium 90mg milligrams
9%Potassium 330mg milligrams
0%Total Carbohydrates 0g grams
0% Dietary Fiber 0g grams
Sugars 0g grams
Protein 21g grams
0% Vitamin A
0% Vitamin C
0% Calcium
15% Iron
* Percent Daily Values are based on a 2000 calorie diet.
INGREDIENTS: 100% Pure Beef.

It's not that unhealthy in comparison, probably slightly better for you. If I had to choose between a Brazilian burger on the shelf or the impossible one I'd probably pick the latter.

gozunda · 21-02-2019 11:01pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That ingredient your referring to Heme? The one pumping oxygen around your blood? Bad for you? Not likely.

Nope. Im referring to Soy leghemoglobin (SLH), a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast. Controversial at least ....
See:
https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18498-a-misguided-experiment

I'm not pushing it but I can see where it has a place in the food chain. It's been completely dismissed here for not factually accurate reason though.

I beg to disagree. You say you haven't even tried it yet! What brand has a "place" in any 'foodchain"???

A lot seems of the debate seems to be about how bad it is for you and the environment. Meat production isn't exactly the best thing for the environment ether. We use plants to make animals into meat, making plants into meat is a lot more sustainable..

And a lot of that is misinformation pushed by the plant based food promoters. As for example when it was falsely claimed that animal agriculture was responsible for some 51% of all greenhouse gas emissions by the WorldWatch Institute. This when the actual global figure was 15%. Unfortunately this type of rubbish is still being repeated.

I would also add that feedstuffs fed to animals are largely derived from left overs or by-products the human food industry, crops which dont meet human grade food quality standards and perhaps most importantly all the livestock which are fed forage from permanent grassland which is not suitable for other forms of cultivation.

So no - saying making plants into meat is a lot more sustainable. is not only inaccurate - it also fails to take into account local beef production here in Ireland as compared to the importation of "Patties" made from Soy and imported from the US which run up massive number of food miles involving the use of large amounts of fossil fuels for trans Atlantic transport etc. The exact same criticism btw which is levied against Brazilian beef - the topic of this thread ...

greysides · 21-02-2019 11:25pm

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He’s probably a closet vegan

Mod: Play the ball please.

drunkmonkey · 21-02-2019 11:56pm

gozunda wrote: »

Nope. Im referring to Soy leghemoglobin (SLH), a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast...

Yea that's the Heme, it's what gives it the blood. It's FDA approved safe to eat and they've requested it to be classified as a food colouring.

Didn't realise you could get a version here in Thunderoad the UK made one. https://m.independent.ie/videos/life/watch-food-enthusiasts-react-to-meatless-bleeding-burger-in-dublin-37791865.html
Going to give it a try the next time i'm passing.

I like burgers, if I can't tell the difference I don't mind swapping out the real thing now and again.

If it can be produced here the environmental impact can't be as bad as your assuming.

older by the day · 22-02-2019 12:01am

After looking at prime time now, I'd say burgers in Ireland will be fairly cheap in a few months time

fritzelly · 22-02-2019 12:14am

As much as too much red meat may not be good for you I would rather keep visiting my local butcher than eat something with ingredients I've never heard of or can barely pronounce.
If you need to buy food that tastes like meat then stop being vegetarian and buy a leg of lamb (gorgeous)

Upstream · 22-02-2019 12:24am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The world does need an alternative to meat that's exactly like meat.

You are right, and the best alternative to meat that's exactly like meat is ...

... meat.

The problem with meat is not the cow, it's the how. It all comes down to how they're managed. Grass and pasture-based livestock have the potential to help build soils and sequester carbon. They can do this at a rate that can reverse global warming in less than a decade. They've built soils depths of over twenty feet on the great plains and they can do it again.

Here's Allan Savory explaining how it can work on a global scale
https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change

Closer to home, my soils have 16 or 17% organic matter in the top four inches, and I've spoken to organic producers with higher levels, over 18% organic matter. If my land was in intensive tillage for 20 or 30 years, it could be more like 3% or less. I'm trying to work out what that translates to, and I'm not quite sure, but with a back of the envelope calculation, I think there is a difference of somewhere between 100 and 150 tons of carbon sequestered per hectare between these two scenarios. That's a lot of cow burps.

I've spent the last year or two trying to learn about regenerative agriculture, and what I can do to help. All I know is I have a long way to go and so much to learn, but properly managed cows are the way forward.

_Brian · 22-02-2019 12:25am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That ingredient your referring to Heme? The one pumping oxygen around your blood? Bad for you? Not likely.

I'm not pushing it but I can see where it has a place in the food chain. It's been completely dismissed here for not factually accurate reason though.

A lot seems of the debate seems to be about how bad it is for you and the environment. Meat production isn't exactly the best thing for the environment ether. We use plants to make animals into meat, making plants into meat is a lot more sustainable.

As for nutrition..

The 2.0

Nutrition Facts
Serving size4 oz. (113g)

Amount per serving
Calories240
% Daily Value*
Total Fat14g 18%
Saturated Fat8g 40%
Trans Fat0g
Cholesterol0mg 0%
Sodium370mg 16%
Total Carbohydrate9g 3%
Dietary Fiber3g 11%
Total Sugars<1g
Includes<1g Added Sugars 1%
Protein19g 31%
Vitamin D0mcg 0%
Calcium170mg 15%
Iron4.2mg 25%
Potassium610mg 15%
Thiamin28.2mg 2350%
Riboflavin0.4mg 30%
Niacin5.3mg 35%
Vitamin B60.4mg 25%
Folate115mcg DFE 30%
Vitamin B123mcg 130%
Phosphorus180mg 15%
Zinc5.5mg 50%
* The % Daily Value tells you how much a nutrient in a serving of food contributes to a daily diet. 2,000 calories a day is used for general nutrition advice.

Standard burger

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size:
1
burger (113g grams)
Amount Per Serving
Calories from Fat 153
Calories 240
% Daily Value*
26%Total Fat 17g grams
35% Saturated Fat 7g grams
Trans Fat 1g grams
28%Cholesterol 85mg milligrams
4%Sodium 90mg milligrams
9%Potassium 330mg milligrams
0%Total Carbohydrates 0g grams
0% Dietary Fiber 0g grams
Sugars 0g grams
Protein 21g grams
0% Vitamin A
0% Vitamin C
0% Calcium
15% Iron
* Percent Daily Values are based on a 2000 calorie diet.
INGREDIENTS: 100% Pure Beef.

It's not that unhealthy in comparison, probably slightly better for you. If I had to choose between a Brazilian burger on the shelf or the impossible one I'd probably pick the latter.

I love the way you slipped in there that plants are being turned into meat being better for the environment.

So, plants can’t be “turned into meat” I don’t care what wizardry amd chemicals you wash through this muck, Bill Gates isn’t turning plants into meat.

Taking plants and super processing them into a substance that resembles meat with all he added chemicals and energy simply can’t be seen to be an environmentally sustainable food.

If you want plants, eat fruit and veg
If you want a burger, eat a beef burger.

If you want lots of health problems from eating a load of un necessary chemicals eat this processed muck.

I take at face value your statement that your neither V or V, but to be honest your grasp on what a good environmentally sustainably produced food is desperately lacking.

I’m seeing many nuances I see when discussing this issue with vegans in that they will absolutely accept any compromise on the environmental or sustainable nature of their food to appease their vegan beliefs. That’s fine, beleive
That fantasy , but don’t for a minute think that any sane person believes that a commercial, super processed imitation food mass produced half way round the world from questionable ingredients, in a country with atrocious food production methods is in any way superior to locally produced foods. It’s just not true.

In this drive to demonise farming vegans and commercial manuipulators are convincing people that fat cat business and share holders somehow have the moral ground on food production. It’s beyond belief that in an age with such information and technology that it appears people are becoming more gullible and down right stupid.

Unearthly · 22-02-2019 12:45am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Didn't realise you could get a version here in Thunderoad the UK made one. https://m.independent.ie/videos/life/watch-food-enthusiasts-react-to-meatless-bleeding-burger-in-dublin-37791865.html
Going to give it a try the next time i'm passing.

I tried that burger and I was not impressed. Felt completely bloated afterwards and felt a bit ill for rest of the day. The saturated fat in the Moving mountain burger is higher than a McDonald's burger, that's how you know they are doing it wrong. Low saturated fat is one of the selling points of a vegan diet so to me the product is a failure

The fake meats should only be used sparingly otherwise people are doing the vegan diet wrong

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 12:57am

Rory28 wrote: »

The impossible burger 2.0 sounds like a great idea but what happens to all the cattle if we just switch to artificial beef?

Slaughter them all or let them loose?

Well the price of beef would fall to the price of the substitute.

So either producers world have to match the price or go out of business.

But yes, the excess would be slaughtered.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 12:59am

Kinda looking at it as alternative to a burger for meat eaters not a burger for vegans.
The moving mountain one doesn't sound as tasty, the beetroot is no substitute for Heme.

fritzelly · 22-02-2019 1:02am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Kinda looking at it as alternative to a burger for meat eaters not a burger for vegans.
The moving mountain one doesn't sound as tasty, the beetroot is no substitute for Heme.

Why would a meat eater swap a real meat burger for that crap? Even the processed burgers are better than that including the budget ones

gozunda · 22-02-2019 1:18am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Yea that's the Heme, it's what gives it the blood. It's FDA approved safe to eat and they've requested it to be classified as a food colouring.

The proper name is Soy leghemoglobin (SLH) which is a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast. and no it's not "blood" btw

And from the article linked previously

When the burger’s manufacturer Impossible Foods first applied to the US FDA for GRAS (Generally Recognised as Safe) status for SLH, the FDA refused to grant it due to the fact that Impossible Foods’ arguments “do not establish safety of SLH for consumption”. But the company went ahead and marketed the burger anyway.

drunkmonkey wrote:

Didn't realise you could get a version here in Thunderoad the UK made one. https://m.independent.ie/videos/life/watch-food-enthusiasts-react-to-meatless-bleeding-burger-in-dublin-37791865.html
Going to give it a try the next time i'm passing.
I like burgers, if I can't tell the difference I don't mind swapping out the real thing now and again.

If it can be produced here the environmental impact can't be as bad as your assuming.

As for 'impossible Burger' the ingredients are to be flown in under licence and then made up and to date sold through the UK etc. So yes the food miles for what is essentially just junk food are horrendous.

...

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 1:18am

fritzelly wrote: »

Why would a meat eater swap a real meat burger for that crap? Even the processed burgers are better than that including the budget ones

To cut down on their meat intake. That's something we need to do, well I do definitely. An odd one of these wouldn't do much harm. No worse than the beef wellington I had tonight when I looked at the ingredients.

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 1:19am

_Brian wrote: »

I love the way you slipped in there that plants are being turned into meat being better for the environment.

So, plants can’t be “turned into meat” I don’t care what wizardry amd chemicals you wash through this muck, Bill Gates isn’t turning plants into meat.

Taking plants and super processing them into a substance that resembles meat with all he added chemicals and energy simply can’t be seen to be an environmentally sustainable food.

If you want plants, eat fruit and veg
If you want a burger, eat a beef burger.

If you want lots of health problems from eating a load of un necessary chemicals eat this processed muck.

I take at face value your statement that your neither V or V, but to be honest your grasp on what a good environmentally sustainably produced food is desperately lacking.

I’m seeing many nuances I see when discussing this issue with vegans in that they will absolutely accept any compromise on the environmental or sustainable nature of their food to appease their vegan beliefs. That’s fine, beleive
That fantasy , but don’t for a minute think that any sane person believes that a commercial, super processed imitation food mass produced half way round the world from questionable ingredients, in a country with atrocious food production methods is in any way superior to locally produced foods. It’s just not true.

In this drive to demonise farming vegans and commercial manuipulators are convincing people that fat cat business and share holders somehow have the moral ground on food production. It’s beyond belief that in an age with such information and technology that it appears people are becoming more gullible and down right stupid.

You haven't explained why it's not sustainable, or at a minimum less sustainable than traditional beef production.

Would this be you just dismissing the product out of hand because it threatens farming? Surely not?!?

Birdnuts · 22-02-2019 1:28am

_Brian wrote: »

We need to be pushing people back to basics of, local produce, food prep and home cooking.
There is a serious addenda that ANYTHING non animal based is better. This simply isn’t true, it’s an outright lie but it’s being pushed by the extreme vegan brigade on one side and massive corporations on the other.

Thats what I love about the French - they have this type of thing nailed and that why its such a pleasure to visit, especcially regions like the Dordogne

_Brian · 22-02-2019 1:31am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You haven't explained why it's not sustainable, or at a minimum less sustainable than traditional beef production.

Would this be you just dismissing the product out of hand because it threatens farming? Surely not?!?

When the sequestration of carbon into grass souls is taken into account properly beef farming is a very environmentally sound sustainable food production method.

Coupled with local traditional butcher slaughter and supply to local customers it has near no food miles associated with it.

Predominantly grass fed beef is a superior beef product.

On tue flip side a highly processed food transported round the world from questionable ingredients.

It’s long known that humans are healthier consuming a variety of foods but the core is to be eating foods in as natural a state as possible, this completely excludes these super processed foods from a healthy diet.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 1:32am

gozunda wrote: »

The proper name is Soy leghemoglobin (SLH) which is a protein that's never before been in the human food supply and produced in GM yeast. and no it's not "blood" btw

And from the article linked previously

The ingredients are flown in under licence and then made up and to date sold through the UK etc. So yes the food miles for what is essentially just junk food are horrendous.

...

It's 2019 that was back in 2017, it's full approved no safety concerns. Eat away. It's a food colouring.
It's a plant based replica of a protein that carrys oxygen in blood. The only way they could mimic it was to GM it and it's the first time they've managed to make it. It's what gives meat not just beef it's meaty quality apparently. (I'm open to try it)
It's nutritional value is more than beef. Don't see how you can call it junk.
Again the food miles, Brazilian beef to the UK or Irish beef to Brazil. Huge waste of resources. This can't be worse.

That article is a bit of a crock no way of knowing if it was the cause and it's the only article and was deleted shortly after being posted online.

MrMusician18 · 22-02-2019 1:40am

_Brian wrote: »

When the sequestration of carbon into grass souls is taken into account properly beef farming is a very environmentally sound sustainable food production method.

Coupled with local traditional butcher slaughter and supply to local customers it has near no food miles associated with it.

Predominantly grass fed beef is a superior beef product.

On tue flip side a highly processed food transported round the world from questionable ingredients.

It’s long known that humans are healthier consuming a variety of foods but the core is to be eating foods in as natural a state as possible, this completely excludes these super processed foods from a healthy diet.

There is no carbon sequestered in grass beyond a growing season. None. There are no farmers mowing grass and then burying it. It's a spurious argument.

Crops are grown, then consumed, and then transformed into meat, which in turn is consumed. The carbon from the grass ends up in the human, so you're hardly claiming that humans are the carbon reservoirs of agriculture?

gozunda · 22-02-2019 2:01am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You haven't explained why it's not sustainable, or at a minimum less sustainable than traditional beef production. Would this be you just dismissing the product out of hand because it threatens farming? Surely not?!?

Sustainable in relation to food production refers to the impact of a product on the environment and the relevant depletion of natural resources by any one product

What is true is that all food production has impacts on the environment in one way or another. Whether that the cultivation of grain or the rearing of livestock.

Looking at this - ask yourself the question which product would fail a test of the lights being put out? By that I am referring to relevant inputs such as fossil fuels and processing.

Irish Beef is a locally produced product when consumed here. It has a relatively straight forward path from farm to fork with distances here being minimised due to the size of the country. And yes beef can and be produced with minimal inputs under Irish conditions where forage makes up the largest part of feedstuff.

Now compare locally produced beef with one if the aforementioned frankenbergers. The raw material detailed for the bergers is soy meal. Most soy meal comes from the US and Brazil and is produced as a by-product of the soya oil industry. This process uses large amounts of water, chemical solvents to extract the oil and meal etc

The soy meal then used as the raw product is further transported to a centralised production facility in the US for processing into the raw material for these bergers. Again this process uses large amounts of water and additives to achieve a final product.

Then when all that is done - the berger product is packaged and then shipped across the Atlantic for final packaging and distribution.

So Mr Musician to answer your question as to whether -

Would this be you just dismissing the product out of hand because it threatens farming? Surely not!

The answer is obviously no. Just because you don't like an answer does not mean that something is being 'dismissed out of hand'

It is quite clear however that the whack-a-molers are out in support of throwing the usual dirt at farming. But there you go - that's not unusual is it?

gozunda · 22-02-2019 2:09am

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's 2019 that was back in 2017, it's full approved no safety concerns. Eat away. It's a food colouring.
It's a plant based replica of a protein that carrys oxygen in blood....

Lol. Did you do science in school or did you read that of the backing a cornflakes package? It's not just used as a 'food colouring' - it is in effect a genetically modified protein. A genetically modified protein that is unknown to the human gut. I have to laugh - If they really just wanted to use a food colouring theres plenty already on the market - no need to go off and get tied up in knots over ...

It is this type of disingenuous whitewashing which is of more concern than the pushing junkfoods like these. But hey eat whatever ****e you like. We wish you well...

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 2:21am

gozunda wrote: »

Sustainable in relation to food production refers to the impact of a product on the environment and the relevant depletion of natural resources by any one product

What is true is that all food production has impacts on the environment in one way or another. Whether that the cultivation of grain or the rearing of livestock.

Looking at this - ask yourself the question which product would fail a test of the lights being put out? By that I am referring to relevant inputs such as fossil fuels and processing.

Irish Beef is a locally produced product when consumed here. It has a relatively straight forward path from farm to fork with distances here being minimised due to the size of the country. And yes beef can and be produced with minimal inputs under Irish conditions where forage makes up the largest part of feedstuff.

Now compare locally produced beef with one if the aforementioned frankenbergers. The raw material detailed for the bergers is soy meal. Most soy meal comes from the US and Brazil and is produced as a by-product of the soya oil industry. This process uses large amounts of water, chemical solvents to extract the oil and meal etc

The soy meal then used as the raw product is further transported to a centralised production facility in the US for processing into the raw material for these bergers. Again this process uses large amounts of water and additives to achieve a final product.

Then when all that is done - the berger product is packaged and then shipped across the Atlantic for final packaging and distribution.

So Mr Musician to answer your question as to whether -

The answer is obviously no. Just because you don't like an answer does not mean that something is being 'dismissed out of hand'

It is quite clear thowever that the whack-a-molers are out in support of throwing the usual dirt at farming. But there you go - that's not unusual is it?

In fairness that's all a load of nonsense. Where did you get those facts from?
Do you even know how it's made. Not a notion by the sounds of it.

drunkmonkey · 22-02-2019 2:26am

gozunda wrote: »

Lol. Did you do science in school or did you read that of the backing a cornflakes package? It's not just used as a 'food colouring' - it is in effect a genetically modified protein. A genetically modified protein that is unknown to the human gut. I have to laugh - If they really just wanted to use a food colouring theres plenty already on the market - no need to go off and get tied up in knots over ...

It is this type of disingenuous whitewashing which is of more concern than the pushing junkfoods like these. But hey eat whatever ****e you like. We wish you well...

It's served in 4000 restraunts and about to hit supermarkets, it's been deemed harmless to humans. Yeast is already well known to the human gut no reason for this to be any different, haven't read of anyone sick or dying and plenty have been eaten.
There nothing wrong with something been modified to make it better.

Upstream · 22-02-2019 2:27am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

There is no carbon sequestered in grass beyond a growing season. None. There are no farmers mowing grass and then burying it. It's a spurious argument.

Crops are grown, then consumed, and then transformed into meat, which in turn is consumed. The carbon from the grass ends up in the human, so you're hardly claiming that humans are the carbon reservoirs of agriculture?

None???

I don't think you have the correct idea about how plants grow and build soil.
Carbon is not sequestered by farmers mowing grass and the decaying matter being turned into soil. That's not how the great plains in Americal got over 20 feet of topsoil. The Red Indians didn't have toppers on their tractors back then...

Carbon is sequestered by plants pumping sugars (carbon) into the root zone.
A healthy annual plant like grass can put somewhere between 50 and 70 percent of the sugars it produces into root exudates to feed the biology in the soil. They, in turn, supply the plant with all the nutrition it needs.

The plant root is a bit like an inside out version of our gut. The process is called the soil food web. It's a bit of a revelation, look it up.

We have been ignoring the soil food web for the past eighty years and feeding chemical fertilizers to our plants instead (this suppresses the microbes in the soil and stops the soil food web functioning normally) and wondering why our environment is in trouble and health problems are on the rise. Things have to change, but not in the way you think.

The Impossible Burger 2.0

Comments