See the entire conversation

1/n A quick tweetstorm about why I think Beyond Meat ($BYND) and Impossible Foods are the trans fat purveyors of our generation.
506 replies and sub-replies as of Jun 02 2019

2/ Let’s start with Beyond Meat. For those that don’t know, $BYND’s flagship product is their Beyond Burger - a pea-protein product that’s supposed to replace the standard ground beef patty.
3/ Take a look at their ingredient list. When you eat a $BYND burger, you’re effectively getting a giant dose of canola oil (terrible for you) and isolated pea protein. With a side of wood fiber, additives and unnatural ingredients.
4/ My main concern here is the heavy concentration of canola oil, as vegetable oils are terrible for you + cause all sorts of health problems (see link).…
5/ When you eat a $BYND burger, you’re effectively consuming a pea protein and canola oil smoothie. Deconstructed, nobody thinks this is good for you. Put it in patty form, and people will apparently consider it healthy. Nuts.
6/ The Impossible Burger ingredients are different: their most controversial ingredient is Soy Leghemoglobin. To make this ingredient, Impossible genetically engineers a yeast bacterium to produce a protein (soy leghemoglobin) that gives their burger more of a “meaty” taste.
8/ My larger concern on both of these burgers is that - at minimum - they are HIGHLY processed products with lots of stuff that doesn't lead to healthier humans: vegetable oils, soy, protein isolates, additives, all non-organic. They are not real foods. (cough, Soylent).
9/ Not only that, but I’m concerned any time I see a nutrient-dense food (like meat) being replaced by a highly processed variant. Historically, that hasn’t done good things for human health.
10/ The human body is an incredibly complex system, about which we still know very little. Complexity research cautions against introducing new things into a complex + related system, because it can have unintended consequences.
11/ All told, neither Impossible nor $BYND deliver on the health message they tout, and they’re not things I’d plan to incorporate into my diet. I'd consider them fake food and - as long as there's not a starvation scenario - would stay far away.
fin/ I'm testing out doing some tweetstorms since my writing has fallen off. Tomorrow, assuming I don't get taken out by an intnernet rage mob, I'll dig into the health of $BYND and Impossible's businesses.
I think the impossible burger tastes good. I gave up beef this year for environmental reasons and when I've craved a burger it hit the spot.
At the moment, the only "study" I can find is this one, which BeyondMeat paid for, so it is as trustworthy as those "smoking is healthy" studies paid for by Philip Morris and friends.…
You still on your one meal a day plan?
We know what happens to someone who eats Big Macs for a month, let’s see if someone is an unhealthy eating the impossible or beyond burger for a month.
There's already adequate evidence that these aren't healthier options so it'd be ignorance if people thought they were. The critical question is whether they are more sustainable, environmentally friendly, etc.
At the moment, the only "study" I can find is this one, which BeyondMeat paid for, so it is as trustworthy as those "smoking is healthy" studies paid for by Philip Morris and friends.…
Don't forget about the sodium. It has 5x sodium of regular burger.
Spot on. Vegan insanity once again.
Don’t forget how bad large ingredient processed foods are for the environment. That’s double digit supply chains.
These products shouldn't be consumed on a regular basis or replace a whole plant-based diet. They're fast foods to be consumed occasionally as any other highly processed product. They help with the transition to a proper plant-based diet or a quick meal on the go. IMO
Why stop at fake meat? There is a ton of unhealthy foods available to consumers. You going to tweet about every unhealthy food out there? Or is the real reason of your "concern" because you have a lot of stock in the meat industry?
The foodie version of #Theranos
dont miss @SarahTaber_bww thread yesterday about how thin the environmental argument is as well
All comes back to @michaelpollan’s “eat (real) food, not too much, mostly plants” in my head..:
Justin: I applaud your courage to publicly express your thought provoking healthy skepticism.
what about $BYND as an investment? Do you think the product is scalable? Mainstream Enlightenment on nutrients won’t come for years or decades most likely...
thanks for the great writing! Interesting to think of it them as "processed" foods
Any tips for a family trying to eat less meat but still eat healthy?
I do wonder what the problem is with plain ole real food.
Complex=/=bad. Theres nothing shocking about hemoglobin, theres a ton in meat. Bynd is very processed, but being processed isnt automatically bad. Also no evidence soy is bad for you, on the contrary, read Harvard nutritions summary. Meat is highly processed, by cows.
Funny thing, there are lots of ways to make organic "veggie" burgers that don't taste like meat but are plenty delicious.
It would be cool if you also tweeted out about the climate benefits of $BYND and Impossible replacing beef. Doesn’t negate your health points, but talks to a more broad range why one would consume those over beef (alongside ethical reasons)
I think these are astronomically overstated. Will cover
Thanks and curious to read!
These burgers are simply processed foods. Whole foods = real food Processed foods = not food. Simple!
That’s why a straight up veggie burger is ALWAYS a better option
See the consumption as a beta test. My best guess in 5-10 years it will be said that it causes cancer. And a Darwin Award needs to be given to all early adopters. 🥇
How about less exploitation, destruction, and torture of sentient animals? There’s a need to focus health of the planet, humans and all animals. Ethics of our food choices should also be paramount when discussing animal ag, CAFOs. I imagine for investors ethics are unimportant?
I'm curious what you think about old-school black-bean burgers. I'll admit, I haven't looked into what actually goes into them, but I'm really not looking for the precise red meat experience, so a good bean burger is a home run for my taste preferences
I tried their burger and had the worst heartburn in my life. Not much taste and the price was ridiculous
Would that not somewhat be grounds for a lawsuit of some kind?
The starvation scenario is why this technology is worthwhile. Also an alternative to mass killing and torturing of animals is not something I will be against. Only way to understand the health risks is to get data on it right?
Thanks for the tweets. I wouldn't eat them even in a starvation scenario. Rather be dead. I prefer my meat to have 1 ingredient: cow
What’s definitively unhealthy about the impossible burger again?
The great thing is that you don't need either animal flesh or Beyond Meet to survive!
Where do they tout health benefits? that’d be egregious. Impossible has more calories, more sat fat, more sodium, and less protein than beef
I Ate an Actual Impossible Burger — Here's What It Really Tastes Like
Read this before you order one at Burger King.
Not to mention the massive amount of sodium.
So.... what's the point of denoting some food products "fake foods" and why should I care if the food I eat is "fake"?
Actually genetically-speaking it’s not very complex. It’s the microbiome that’s gives it it’s complexity
And the impact of these fake meats on the microbiome is also not well known
Let me here an AMEN!!!
Not exactly what complexity research suggests. The goal is adaptation. While new things are introduced they create ripple impacts in unpredictable ways to other parts of the system but a complex system without adaptability(new things) is stagnant and dies off anyway
Also not supporting crap@food. Just clarifying complexity.
Yes but at the level of the human individual, the species may evolve but you're dead. I consider that bad, though apparently there are now anti-natalists that will disagree with me
You know what has proven carcinogenic effects ? Red meat. Canola oil is not a trans fat, and is demonstrably better than animal fat (saturated). By the way almost every ingredient in the list you shared is natural, eg ascorbic acid is Vitamin C and acetic acid is vinegar.
I was with you wholeheartedly until this tweet. Assuming "nutrient-dense" is by calories (what else would you measure density against for consumables?), meat isn't typically very nutrient-dense. Whole, plant-based foods are considerably more nutrient-dense per calorie, no?
Red meat causes colon cancer
Last I checked beef burgers have not done good things for people’s health. High cholesterol, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, just to name a few.
Disagree, those studies are mixed and have crazy lifestyle confounders.
Either way though, my point is just that these are not a healthy alternative to meat any more than a Juul is a healthy alternative to smoking.
1. Who's claiming BYND is healthy? They're replacing beef burgers. Are those considered a healthier option? 2. There are two very different types of meat, the majority is highly processed as well
no sufficiently powered human studies show organic food consumption results in better health; many that attempt to do so end up significant confounded
Yes! The "highly processed" should give enough reason for deep inquiry. Other than that: why compare urself to existing? and, why to label everything?
Pea protein is a big allergy concern ...
You mention soy is bad for you. Does that include items like Sofritas? Damn hard to get protein dense vegetarian foods around here
What about beans and legumes? (Soy is not bad for everyone. You got to know your body.)
I try to eat beans on the daily, too much messes up my gut. Honestly ever since going on a high protein diet to support weight lifting, gut feels a lot more inflamed. Not sure what to do about it. How can you tell if soy is bad for your body?
Stop eating soy for a few weeks. Eat it and see how you feel.
Hah! Vegans lie too.
Vegetables oils and soy are proven to lead to healthier humans. That is demonstrably true.
Please send any research you have that supports this
I generally agree with what you’re saying...but why cite Taleb as an expert on GMOs? Maybe expert in that?
taleb is famously bad outside his field of expertise which is finance
If I recall correctly, the reason Taleb dislikes GMOs isn't their affects on consumers but rather their potentially catastrophic effect on life on earth, e.g. like invasive species. And even this lacks evidence. While I am generally sympathetic to Taleb, I'm not persuaded here.
I’m not sure about Talebs real reasons for not liking GMOs but they seem plenty emotional rather than reasoned to me judging by the mans crazily toxic and abusive public behaviour, which seems to drip into the bits of his books he dedicates to the topic just as well
He behaves much better when appearing on EconTalk! 😀
Soy leghemoglobin isn't a foreign ingredient
People like to be told what to eat not what they should eat. I feel bad for the people who will consume THIS product blindly.
The only way we will be able to feed the growing population (targeted to grow to 20B+ in our lifetime) is through GMOs. I welcome the research and acknowledge there will be speed bumps along the way.
Population is shrinking in all developing countries
This just ended up being an anti gmo thread?
yes but is it foreign? Heme component in soybeans ie the root system..yes mostly foreign to Humans but not entirely as your portray as obviously own blood has meme molecules! ASk a biochemist please!
Since when Nassim Taleb is an authority on anything?
Mr Kadis, Prof Taleb is a risk expert and he discusses tail risks of GMOs. Are you an authority on tail risk?
what exactly is the controversy here? controversial for people who can’t digest proteins? if the controversy is over this particular protein being somehow harmful (hardly so since haemoglobins arent known to act out in the gut in any way except get digested) what’s the mechanism?
Besides the fact Canola is highly refined industrial oil and highly processed foods reverse the "full" and "starving" hormonal signals?
Any time I try their burgers I get sick ;-(
Why is it controversial ?
That's the "yeast extract", right? I'll stick with non-#GMO beef ...
Justin, do us all a favor... take your hand, ball it up into a fist and hit yourself in the face with it.
Do you care about helping to end the animal exploitation/murder industrial complex - or are you too self absorbed/entitled to care.
"Yeast bacterium" do no exist. There are yeast (eukaryotes) and there are bacteria (prokaryotes).
no one is saying the patty is healthy, it's just an alternative to a live animal slaughtering-environment destroying-obesity inducing- all american hamburger patty
seeing as we might not know if it is healthier than beef in the long run, is the claim on par with anyone saying cow meat is a health food?
Did you read something different to me? The claims were about complex systems having complex elements added to them. Cows evolved alongside humans, the constructed patty did not. He didn't claim cows were healthier, he claimed that you shouldn't wildly mess with complex systems.
both cattle and wheat consumption have appeared on similar timescales of around 10 thousand years ago. this argumentation is some absurd stuff. We can take your argument and say that it is dangerous to eat meat from non cattle animals because “we haven’t evolved alongside them”
That's not quite what I meant. Yes we have been an agrarian culture for 10,000 years but omnivores for much longer. I was implying we, like most of our food sources, are broadly evolved naturally, not complex artificial processes. Whether this is good or bad is another matter.
Like you acknowledge whether something has evolved naturally has no bearing on its +ve/-ve impacts on mankind. Certainly all commercial crops, and livestock, are products of intense artificial selection over these ten thousand years, and as a result humans live longer than ever
The period of the most intense artificial selection, in the past 500 years, has corresponded to the greatest increase in human prosperity we have ever seen
I don't believe I am disagreeing with your point at all. You are also ignoring the advantages of technology and medical advancements. The health and prosperity has more to do with oil, antibiotics, vaccines and clean water than crop production, but your argument isn't wrong.
Sorry if this is unclear - my point is that all of the domains which we have mentioned - agriculture, medical advances, sanitation - all of these can be viewed as complex systems. We have messed with these complex systems or built them anew. Outcome looking pretty good to me
At least, comparatively to before we started messing with them. There are always problems and things to work on, but things have gotten better overall for many people
I don't disagree. I love technology and the advancement of the world that we have, and I agree that many of the changes we have introduced are brilliant. But, I also know that pursuit of a profit drives businesses to fuck up. I trust science more than commerce.
Sure yeah but this is a much more substantial argument IMHO. But to claim that we should not do something simply because it is perturbing something complex is no reasoning at all. Glad we’ve triangulated onto this
substantive*, even
However the original tweet was about introducing complex systems and the need for caution, not to -not- introduce them, but to maintain a cautious approach that measures, monitors and responds. How is that a problem, and how is my support of a conservative approach an issue?
And the period of greatest obesity has coincided with the largest advancement of processing, we can all play the correlation merry go round. In fact people had better waist lines when there was severe rationing, isolating factors does not give us a balanced picture.
Also what the hell is 'arguementation' supposed to mean :p
So if you don’t know if it will be healthier or not you can claim it’s healthier? That’s weird
Citation please. I do not know of any modern study that links protein to obesity, in fact there are numerous that contradict such claims and lay the blame at the use of artificial fructose and complex carb overuse. Neither present in beef.
Please tell us what you are eating when you eat a factory-produced fast food burger. It’s not better.
Why do we have canine teeth ?
It's a partial replacement for animal products that helps to wean the general public from an unsustainable and inhumane food model. No one should be eating this stuff all day every day - the same is true for beef, chicken, and pork.
When there is starvation, war zone , other disasters, then sure do replace the meat 🥩 Otherwise just change the diet habits. I agree these things can’t be good for your long term.
Impossible foods mission statement is around sustainability and a fraction of the water consumption than beef. Not saying it’s healthy, but there are different reasons to eat one.
Red meat is not good for you. In fact it’s linked to cancer in multiple ways.
how does it compare to commercially available ground beef in greens of healthiness? What are the energy and environmental costs of producing meatless meat?
Um compare it to a meat hamburger. Try aren’t trying to be healthy at all. Just healthier than beef.
Yuck. How can we keep them from serving this goo in our schools?
What protein supplement do you recommend for people trying to build muscle/workouts? Pea protein has made huge inroads in that market.
When Wall Street gets a concept in its teeth,... (p intended).
What burger is healthy? It's still a burger regardless. You have no idea the stuff that's in ground beef that's not disclosed, so many chemicals, hormones, and preservatives are injected into the cow and its food before it becomes ground beef.
Does Whole Foods $AMZN have its own version yet of BeyondMeat $BYND #TeamTackle
Nuts 🥜! Agreed! Thanks for the eye opening perspective!
Ive never had a cheeseburger smoothie but I doubt you’d sell a lot of them
You should see how much seed oils they add to everything in the Middle East..... then wonder why they have the highest diabetes rates. Honestly, they think it’s a unlimited ingredient. Because they truly believe it’s healthy. 🤷🏻‍♂️
Think you meant to say seed oils rather than vegetable oils?
Seed oils are commonly labeled simply as Vegetable Oil.
Bit confusing that because olive oil isn't bad for you.. quite the opposite
How much is “heavy”?
some associations and mice studies aren’t very convincing tbh
Why would I trust the Harvard School of Public Health when I can read the website of the author of “Your Personal Paleo Code”?
thanks for this, Justin. what do you recommend as the healthiest replacement for vegetable oils?
For anyone following along, please review Chris’ “credentials” on this or any health/biochemistry/nutrition matters:
This man is built of pseudo science 😬
This is probably the most uninformed post in this thread. Unsaturated vegetable oils are the safest fat you can consume, and fat is absolutely necessary in any diet. Sure, have nothing but oil for dinner & you won't do well, but you *need* fat and vegetable oil is the safest
Re: article. Olive and coconut oil are highly processed as well. And not sure about it advocating health benefits of duck fat and lard, lol.
Do you need a prescription for that?
Is it really a large dose ? A quick google says that the jury is still out
Not only are some of those ingredients individually unhealthy. There may be combinations that have never been tried in food-products before! Someone please let me know when some RCTs are available! (I won't hold my breath).
That is incredibly gross 🤮
I just prepared 2 burgers in an iron skillet, the whole house smells like fried something, it tasted fine but my stomach is not happy...will avoid going forward.
Who said that canola oil is terrible for you? It's one of the healthiest vegetable oils you can consume.
Keep reading in the thread but this is almost definitively not true
Could you share the source of the text screenshot?
Someone disappeared lol. Hate when people make claims without evidence
You have a scientific source for that? A cursory read of several scientific articles seems to suggest you’re wrong.
Exactly another fake pump via unscrupulous greedy beta jerkoffs #BeyondMeatLies
I am so happy you are speaking out about this... I have been suspecting whether this is going to be like margarine of the 1980s
This is a good thread. I’ll have a cow man.
Also let's be real about "wood fiber." All cellulose comes from plants, most typically and densely from the stalk of the plant. And pedantically, bamboo is not wood.
Easy Bull, next week is earnings. Remember Pinterest? McDonald’s is going with Tyson foods. Beyond could lose 50% of its Friday close cap.
Broke? You live in Bermuda bro😭. Bill Gates is no Warren Buffet.
$BYND The stock market is a device for transferring money from the impatient to the patient. – Warren Buffett
BS. All you have to do is read Barron's.… $BYND
Let’s Talk About a Risk for Beyond Meat Stock
Beyond Meat’s reliance on co-manufactures and related disputes with former manufacturing partners point to a potential risk for a company that just had the best first-day IPO of the year.
This is $BYND HQ. Little warehouse flex space in El Segundo. Probably costs ¢.80 per sq ft. You think they can supply McDonald’s or KFC? you think they’re worth 6 billion market cap? This is a penny stock. Bring on ER. #bearish
“Investors won’t have to wait long for results. $BYND will be making its inaugural qtrly earnings report June 6. Approach this stock with caution. It’s oft-repeated phrase on Wall St ..: in the short term the market is a casino, in the long term it’s a weighing machine.” (2/2)
We’ll see. The short term borrow rate is 92% so there’s hardly any downward pressure on $BYND. Not to mention we’re still in the lockup period. MM are pumping this to dumb bag holders so they can buy cheap puts and pull the rug on retail bulls.
51% of people that own $BYND are short. That was as of Friday, it may be higher than that by now. $BYND is going down hard. It's only a matter of when. $BYND has no right being priced above $25 - and that's generous.
Excellent research!!!
I tried one of these burgers last week. I just stopped being sick 10 minutes ago.
are you announcing a rebrand to Kettle and Burger? #NationalBurgerDay
I had no idea it was national burger day. Thank you for pointing this out haha
Processed meats are Level 1 Carcinogens according to the WHO. That’s the same as cigarettes. Saying meat is healthy is just a lie.
I'll call your paleo-blog article and raise you "...the most comprehensive survey of food, environment, social practices and diseases ever made in China-and one of the largest epidemiological studies ever done anywhere." - Science Magazine…
So I'm assuming you both 1. kept your biases and 2. didn't read the actual article. Sad.
Why do you assume that I'm biased and you aren't? I read the article and it doesn't state that meat is healthy anywhere. The author also promotes ancestral health, which means we should only be eating plants based on human dentition and intestine length, which matches herbivores.
If you actually look at the studies / data backing your claim they're pretty far-fetched. Your link: "Limited evidence means that a positive association has been observed between..." The 'positive association' is from epidemiological studies that use survey data...
Learn the difference betw. absolute & relative risk plus how the epidemiological research is done that IARC used as the basis 4 their decision. Then after u do, u'll realize what a farce ur certainty is.… The associated R/R is so low the claims r a JOKE
Absolute Versus Relative Risk- What’s the Difference?
We’ve all read headlines like the following: “Pfizer rare heart disease drug reduces risk of death by 30 percent in study.” “Eating processed meat daily increases the risk o…
I know about risk. I have two scientific publications on the subject. @jwmares posted about how BYND might be unhealthy. I’ve stated that meat is unhealthy. The WHO backs my assertion. What is backing up the claim that meat is healthy?
Oh pls, if u had a clue about risk, u'd realize how absurd the IARC's findings were. The ASSOCIATED R/R for processed meat was 18%. The A/R is 1%. The R/R 4 smoking is 3500%. Over 1/2 of the IARC's panel were epidemiologists that supported vegetarian lifestyles. So lots of bias
Watch and learn: John Ioannidis: The role of bias in nutritional research The WHO IARC panel didn't include any RCT's or even any animal studies in its meta-analyse assessment....Only epi-studies reviewed by primarily biased epidemiologists.
John Ioannidis: The role of bias in nutritional research
John P.A. Ioannidis, C.F. Rehnborg Professor in Disease Prevention in the School of Medicine, and Professor, by Courtesy, of Statistics and Biomedical Data S...
Who says meat is healthy? Meat is a trillion dollar industry. Surely there must be a ton of scientific literature extolling the health benefits of meat. Except there isn’t, because there aren’t health benefits. Best you can say is it isn’t as bad. Sounds like Big Tobacco.
Just look at the nutrients in red meat 2 begin with- All the essential amino acids near ur full RDA requirements, also bio-available minerals including zinc & iron plus fat soluble vitamins (A1, D3, K2) & B12 Read:… Most beef is raised on small farms
What is the role of meat in a healthy diet?
Red meat is a nutrient dense food that is an important source of complete protein with all essential amino acids, highly bioavailable iron, zinc, selenium, and
I read this article (and some of the studies) as well. Many of the studies are crap. You always want to look for a statement of how the research was funded and any conflict of interest. The ones I've looked at did not have any statement. That's a major red flag.
Actually u want 2 look 1st at the methodology & then the data. If u actually did that, u'd realize how worthless all the epi-studies ur hanging all ur anti-meat rhetoric hat on really r. But that seems a bit beyond ur comprehension level. Anyway, it's been cute, but bye now
Here is the real bias: This article was in an ASAS journal. The ASAS is a lobby group for the meat industry. "Membership is open to individuals, ... or firms interested in ... production, processing, marketing, or distribution of livestock and livestock products"
Doesn't matter, the nutrients r irrefutable. Though what's amusing about ur conspiracy arguments is that u don't seem 2 acknowledge that most research today is funded by "big" something esp. processed food, pharmacy, biotech, venture cap, etc. Just look at research Unilever funds
You can get all the nutrient you need without eating meat. Vitamin B12 from nutritional yeast, iron from spinach, etc., etc.. All without increased risk of cancer and heart disease. Good research states their funding. Your studies don't. That's bad science.
LOL. Spinach has chelators called oxalates that bind iron. Most plants have chelators. B12 isn't in nutritional yeast unless it's been fortified. Can't get preformed A1 or D3 from plants. ALA 2 DHA not good either so u need 2 pop algae pills. Plant only diets r sub-optimal
That's why gorillas and other herbivorous primates are popping pills all the time. Makes sense to me. I've been vegan for 2 years and my iron levels are great which is weird if iron stores only last 3 months. I get regular blood screenings and my nutrient levels are perfect.
A few thousand years of history says its healthy
You’re flipping the burden of to the wrong side. We’ve been eating an omnivorous diet for millennia, and there is no real “proof” that meat is bad for you. + the WHO title you’re hiding behind is just... lazy
Here's a good discussion w. 1 of the members of WHO IARC panel on meat/cancer. He was a dissenter who didn't agree w. slight majority's opinion. He basically states most members already had their pre-formed biases that they were just looking 2 confirm
Peak Human - Unbiased Nutrition Info for Optimum Health, Fitness & Living: Part 24 - Dr. David Klurfeld on Meat NOT Causing Cancer, Bogus Vegetarian Scientists, and Balanced Nutrition
Welcome back everyone, I’m Brian Sanders and I quit my job and have dedicated my life to the investigation of nutrition and lifelong health. I’m creating the feature length documentary Food Lies, this podcast, and a health technology company here in Los Angeles with a doctor and 2 other partners. Today my guest is Dr. David Klurfeld, which is a quite a treat. This is his first podcast appearance and had to get special clearance to be able to participate. He couldn’t talk about certain things because he’s the National Program Leader for Human Nutrition in the Agricultural Research Service of the USDA since 2004. He was also on the working group of the World Health Organization that decided meat causes cancer in 2015. I won’t leave you guessing - he was very opposed to it and called it “the most frustrating professional experience of his life.” He’s accumulated a vast amount of knowledge over his 40 years researching nutrition and dietary factors in cardiovascular diseases and cancer. He wrote an amazing peer-reviewed article defending meat titled “what is the role of meat in a healthy diet” which I linked to in the show notes. He’s not going to support a fully carnivorous diet, but certainly sees past the bogus vegan propaganda Speaking of support - PLEASE support Food Lies on Indiegogo. Thanks for everything so far. The campaign just ended but Indiegogo allows us to keep funding because we hit our baseline goal. We need a bit more help to hit the real goal, however. Pre-order a copy of the film or check out some of the other perks. Also, this podcast has a website that I have barely even mentioned. Check out for all episodes and detailed show notes. A little more about Dr. Klurfeld before we start: He is responsible for the scientific direction of the intramural human nutrition research conducted by USDA laboratories. He has published more than 200 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters. He was Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of the American College of Nutrition for 6 years and is currently Associate Editor of the American Journal for Clinical Nutrition. He is also a member of National Institute for Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council. Let’s just say he’s done his homework… and still enjoys a good steak… here he is!   Show Notes Dr. David Klurfeld focuses his research on the 3 macronutrients and their effect on health on chronic disease - specifically breast and colon cancer People debate on how much what we eat affects diet and disease A paper published tries to stick all of cardiovascular disease precisely on 10 factors Full article: David and I spoke earlier and are on the same page - there’s no one-size-fits-all solution for how to eat, and nobody should pretend they have all the answers. There’s a framework and some general guidelines, however, that people should be aware of (if this isn’t already abundantly clear, this is the goal of the Food Lies film They have high salt as #1 factor of “cardiometabolic mortality attributable to dietary habits” and #2 being “low intake of nuts and seeds” There’s no evidence to support these specific quantities like amount of PUFAs Residual confounding is a big problem that’s not really addressed The thing that meat consumption correlates with most is not living a healthy life and ignoring doctor’s recommendations. Smoking, not exercising, etc. Eating meat made us human - why would it be killing us? Dr. David Klurfeld: Red meat is somehow blamed for a multitude of varying diseases and cancers. Imagine if one medication was purported to cure all of these disparate things? It’s just not plausible You can get half your daily requirement of protein in just 3.5 ounces of meat Dr. David Klurfeld: there are 8 essential amino acids which are in animal foods but absent in all plant foods We should get the best of both worlds and eat an omnivorous diet We don’t know exactly what our ancestors ate but they sure didn't have international trade of peaches and didn’t have farms. We chased animals He’s done a lot of research on fiber and therefore not that hot on the carnivore diet Even though there’s no requirement for fiber in our guidelines, he believes we have more science now He believes if you don't eat fiber in your diet, your body will eat away the good mucus membrane in your intestinal walls I ask about people or populations on long term carnivore diets - connective tissue in animals feed gut intestines like fiber does He also says the lifetime risk of colon cancer is only 5 out 100 - so we’d have to study hundreds of thousands of people for a long period of time to get meaningful data - we just don’t know the effects He’s like to see dietary guidelines have a grade for the level of evidence After all the decades of research and gazillions of dollars he still can’t say anything with any level of certainty about what you can eat to get or not get cancer Processed meat is said to increase risk of cancer by 1.2 while cigarettes are 10 to 30 times the risk You don’t know if it’s real risk or noise in the system at these very low levels like 1.1 and 1.2 He talks about studies they do which are pretty controlled with meals handed out and weighed in the lab - way better than these bogus food questionnaires People can’t remember what they ate over the course of the whole year has a graphing tool for correlations. He made a graph showing the correlation between per capita consumption of beef and deaths by lightning that are correlated by almost 90% - this stuff CAN’T show causation He actually appeared in the plant based film Forks Over Knives where they tried to get him with a gotcha moment and make it seem like the meat industry is funding them and they are biased Dr. David Klurfeld says the USDA is a giant organization with 90k employees and many different departments - they don’t influence each other though when it comes to studies. He is 100% certain about that He’s seen vegetarians on these committees who want everyone to be vegetarian, but never meat eaters who want everyone to eat meat He believes being a vegetarian is a conflict of interest on these committees He was on the World Health Organization working group to decide if meat causes cancer in 2015 with a bunch of vegetarians and vegans and says it was the most frustrating professional experience of his life There were 22 scientists - half of which were epidemiologists They claimed they used 800 studies but they actually only used 18 There was a group of people that were strongly against the vote He thinks a number of the people made up their minds before they even arrived National Cancer Institute study with 900 people split into 2 groups who had an intestinal polyp removed on a colonoscopy. One group told to eat whatever they want, one group was assigned a “healthy” diet low in red meat and processed meat, high in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. 3 years later the risk to get a 2nd polyp was exactly the same in both groups. The emission of red and processed meats did nothing. Then came the Women’s Health Initiative - largest nutrition study in history. 9 years of a low fat diet compared to a control - again, no difference in risk for colon cancer So they threw out the 2 studies that were actually scientifically controlled on humans, none of the animal studies showed any problem with meat, and they're left with epidemiology and mechanistic studies they CANNOT show causation One of the members of the working group did a study feeding mice bacon and also an agent to induce cancer and actually found the bacon diet reduced precancerous lesions! They relied on one study that fed mice blood sausage at 3 times the normal dose of protein and the diet had a calcium deficiency - only then was The report on that 2015 decision finally came out this summer and he has no idea why or if they omitted those studies he brought up He mentioned to a staff member of the WHO that he thought people on the working group should declare that they are a vegetarian as a conflict of interest - she laughed and said she was a vegetarian and they changed the subject Being a vegetarian, in his view, is far more of a conflict of interest than who funds you - it's a more deep-seated belief He estimates ¼ to ⅓ of the committee making the decision against red meat were vegetarians His journal article “The role of meat in a healthy diet” Since the only used observational studies, it should only be suggestive that they should look into it more, certainly not causal In other fields of study this is the case. Nutrition is somehow held to different and much looser standards Nutrition researchers with a bias think they're saving the world and push this information without solid evidence, just their beliefs and some observations People have different responses to whole grains and refined grains - there’s no way to tell. So many factors from gut bacteria to genetics It’s impossible to give everyone in the country personalized tests and recommendations. Personalized nutrition is the future though. What can we do now knowing this? His personal nutrition ideas are 1) eat a variety of foods, 2) don’t eat too much of any one food, 3) enjoy what you eat He mentions nutrient density - Americans eat an enormous amount of calories from non-nutrient dense foods packed with white flour plus sugar and fat Eating out used to be a once per week treat, now it's almost every meal Soda used to be a 7oz bottle as a treat - now people are luggin home multiple 2 liters to have on hand at all times We started getting obese when we gave out the dietary guidelines - the problem was we said eat less fat so carbohydrates got a free pass He thinks we are on a bounce back from the low fat thing and it's not correct to say carbs are bad Unless you have high blood pressure you don’t have to go on a low salt diet Salt is essential and fine - the problem is processed foods usually have too much salt so we think it’s a problem, but it’s actually the processed food For all vitamins and minerals - it's dose dependent “The dose makes the poison” - toxicologists have known this for 500 years With nutrition it’s all or nothing, though All the studies we have showing fruits and vegetables are good for us are from people eating conventionally raised produce - not organic He says half the fruits and vegetables we eat have no pesticide residue on them at all - the USDA tests thousands and thousands of samples each year Here’s the latest available (2016) report He’s right - it says only 0.46% of samples exceeded the safe levels The permissible levels have built in margins of safety He says heart attack rates are way down and cancer is up due to us living longer (I beg to differ) Commercial fryers can have oxidized PUFAs We need a more balanced Omega 3 to Omega 6 ratio We should be cooking more at home - no profit for big food manufacturers however What about carcinogens in meat from burning or charring? I say we have been cooking meat for 2 million years and have developed mechanisms to deal with this acute stressor just like the small toxins in plants The animal studies pointing to problems in animals had 1000 times the carcinogens as in a well done piece of meat (that I would never cook anyway…) Why would we blame meat, that we’ve been eating for all of human history, for our modern diseases Elderly people need adequate protein and ground beef would be preferable to cottage cheese or tofu because all of the great micronutrients and total nutrient profile It’s insane that what many people today consider a “healthy diet” is one that avoids red meat He did the first study showing benefits of red wine back in the 80s Future of nutrition research is going to be more personalized Companies are selling a bunch of yogurt - we have no idea if those help your gut bacteria or not Maybe we’ll have 10-20 “buckets” to put people in based on their physiology that will give them an ideal nutritional approach It’s all about developing a healthy pattern of eating   Preorder the film here:   Film site: YouTube:   Follow along:   Theme music by
You guys sounds like big Tobacco or climate change deniers. Ad-hominem attacks are not valid reasons to change anyone’s mind. Dispute the China Study. Dispute our intestine/body size ratio. We shouldn’t eat meat, we weren’t designed for it.
Ugh "Human's weren't designed to eat meat" isn't an argument 🤦‍♂️. We've been hunting and eating animals for as far back as we have historical records of. We do know vegans are at high-risk of developing nutrient deficiencies that lead to health risks.
Shane u can't have a sane discussion w. a zealot. Their deficiencies screw up their cognition. The herbivore argument emanates from a creationist (Milton Mills) that any paleo-anthropology 101 course would quickly debunk. Veganism is dysevolutinary
How sliced meat drove human evolution
Chewing less may have allowed early humans to evolve features needed for speech
It's fun though ;) Seriously, I have nothing against vegans / vegetarians, ~70% of my diet is vegetarian . I just think the ethics argument (factory farming sucks) is more compelling than the health argument.
Factory farming does suck, but the broader argument of whether or not 2 eat meat based on "ethics" isn't a simplistic dialectic. Neither is the environmental argument. Problem w. 2 many vegans though r bipolar cognitive disorders, so they only view the world dialectically.
I’m not paid to advertise for meat centric restaurants in LA. I’m a scientist. My wife is a MD. We looked at the evidence (health, environment, animal welfare, etc) and decided to go vegan. Studies show there is no benefit to eating meat and there is probably harm. So why do it?
The WHO is a non-profit. The meat industry is a trillion $$ industry. The bias is tilted toward meat consumption. Canada and Brazil food guides (only ones created without lobbyists at the table) say you don’t need to eat meat.
the force is strong in this one
Processed meats and natural meats are not the same thing. You have missed the point..the clue is in the word PROCESSED..
1/2 Yeah cheers ...ask yourself why the world population is getting fatter when the WHO recommends a low fat diet? Find out what causes T2D, metabolic syndrome, non alcoholic fatty liver disease, CVD etc , etc ...let me help you...sugar, not natural healthy fats inc. saturated
You are making a false equivalence. Saying meat is unhealthy does not mean I am saying that sugar is healthy. You don’t have to eat meat to be healthy.
2/2 noticed a lot of “limited evidence, other explanations,evidence is not strong, high consumption” and most glaring “12. red meat is NOT established as a cause of cancer” in the WHO report that’s without their “one in a million” estimate 😈
Red meat is not a carcinogen, nor does it cause heart disease. A very small amount of non biased research will tell you this.
Love it. Am very interested in this space and have tried the burgers. Didn’t realize the ingredients were so controversial.
It is said if you can’t recognise or pronounce the ingredients don’t even think about eating it
thats terrible advice
What should babies do?
Drink breast milk of course.
Give this list a shot. If you can’t pronounce anything on it, stop eating all fruits and pretty much anything else with any flavor.
😂. Touché it !
These are not added ingredients or highly processed they are naturally occurring compounds ...guess you missed the point ....NURSE!!! 😂😂😂😂
Point was that “can’t say it/don’t eat it” is stupid. Smush apples in a bucket, set outside. In a week bucket will contain natural ethanol (C2-O5-OH); apples ferment using wild yeast from the air. You really believe that C2-O5-OH is different than ethanol made in a factory?
Talking added ingredients not naturally occurring compounds
Yeah, that’s terrible advice.
I didn't think they were touted as healthy - just that it replaces a meat burger in taste (sort of) and consistency (sort of).
(But this is a great thread - thanks for posting)
thanks for reading! both use language that suggests they're healthy, and i'd argue overall perception leans that they're "good for you and the planet". which i take exception to
What are your thoughts on whether they are good for the planet?
Here in Brazil we're very aware of the dangers of the livestock business for the environment. It's a real threat to the Amazon forest (and other biomes) and a huge political issue. That reason alone makes me very excited about meat alternatives.
UK supermarkets are ‘buying corned beef linked to illegal Amazon rai…
British supermarkets are selling corned beef from a company accused of involvement in illegal deforestation in the Amazon, according to environmental investigators. Morrisons, Waitrose, Iceland, Lidl
I second this question. Great thread, but you didn't mention much about the environmental benefits. Impossible and Beyond can change their recipes and incorporate whole foods. The demand for Plant-Based products has been validated by the Beyond IPO IMHO.
As opposed to every other crap low fat, low sugar, organic, probiotic, other marketing bs? This is America where food companies can say anything. Never felt impossoblenwas pushing anything other than meat less.
Folks out there actually being led to think that it's healthier than a real burger, just because it's plant-based
I applaud your avoidance of processed foods but saying that burgers and sausages (what Beyond Meat is replacing) are better is just crazy.
A beef patty in of itself is very nutritious/nutrient dense and has one ingredient plus seasoning. They have just managed to repackage cheap and low quality ingredients and confer a health halo onto what is just high concept junk food.
Meat is a carcinogen and linked with heart disease. Processed food also sucks. Why not just eat fruits and vegetables? Millions of species get everything they need from plants, including ancestral humans. Our teeth and intestines are designed to just eat plants.
“Meat” is such a vague term. Red meat is the most nutrient dense food on the planet. Follow the likes of @MdSaladino @SBakerMD @FoodLiesOrg @tednaiman @KenDBerryMD @KetoCarnivore to learn more, if you still can. Based on your comments, you may lack the ability.
Since you've insulted me, I think I may have touched a nerve. I'm sorry for that. Have you considered why you have an emotional response to someone saying something you disagree with? Do you still think your position is rational considering your emotional response?
Just making the point, it appears your mind is already made up. I know meat, particularly red meat, is not a carcinogen. It Would appear your mind is closed but feel free to prove me wrong. And there’s certainly no emotion involved, just a casual inference based on your comments.
They can say what they like, they will never convince me, because I know better. I have eaten meat all my life and got fat/sick. Today, I still eat meat and Im no longer fat/sick. Conclusion: meat did not make me fat/sick! Hard to top
What did you change?
I stopped eating refined carbs and starches like breads, cereal, pasta, rice, potato, sugar, margarine, vegetable oils.
@fatadaptedtrade I suggest you watch “Forks over Knives” on Netflix. They discuss the causal mechanisms of meat causing cancer. Plus ad-hominem attacks aren’t valid reasons for saying meat is healthy. Do better.
Watch a vegan propaganda film for some real solid evidence 😂😂
Wait, where is the ad hom attack?
can you clarify where you got your information about our intestines? where can we review the evidence to back up your claim out digestive system is "designed for plants" , TIA
Thanks for the question. You can watch “What the Health” on Netflix. The host of the show is annoying but the doctors are great. The studies are cited on “What the Health” website.
I’m seeing more and more people who have decided to go vegetarian based on a Netflix documentary. Such a shame people are so easily manipulated. Hopefully someone sues Netflix in the future for being so irresponsible with public health
A study was done a few years ago about B12 deficiency. plant eaters were compared with SAD eaters. the brains of the participants began to shrink. by end of study, the smallest brain of the participant on the SAD was bigger than the biggest brain of plant eating participant.
1: I don’t really blame you for starting there, but what they don’t tell you in either film is how the studies were conducted and what they’re capable of showing or not. It’s not arbitrary to say some studies are good and some not.
2: I couldn’t have told you the difference until I ran across people who were capable of showing the difference between good studies and bad ones. @garytaubes is a master at this and so is @bigfatsurprise. They both have books worth reading but it’s a lot to take in.
“Studies” 😂🤣
You watched one movie and think you're a science expert?
This "meat is a carcinogen" line keep going around and around, started by the Seventh Day Adventists in the 19th century. Recent studies, that fully account for other lifestyle factors, don't confirm it.
I suggest you watch “Forks over Knives” on Netflix.
Vegan activist movie is not a valid source of information.
I've been sent a lot of Paleo-blog articles as evidence. No one has complained about them. A movie is an accessible first step. Then they can read the research if they want.
The cognitive dissonance that is required to equate a vegan activists animal welfare movie with that of a well sourced nutrition blogpost is mind boggling. But unfortunately not unexpected.
Find me an scientific article that states they had no conflict of interest and says meat is good for you. The China Study and the WHO say meat is bad for you. You want to talk research, back it up. 2019 Canada food guide also recommends plant based diet.
Epidemeology is not valid, so China Studyand the WHO and the 2019 Canadian food guide are completely irrelevant. Campbell intentionally misleads his audience by blaming the effects of aflatoxin (from plants) on casein... And feeding his rats a selenium deficient diet.
Ok, I’ve heard that from others. But where are the neutral studies saying meat is good? If meat and plants are comparable, why eat meat with the associated environmental damage and animal cruelty? Are you going to claim that industrial feedlots are ok?
1/ No RCT has ever been performed on meat consumption from which you could cite on this question. Nor for plants. The only existing studies are those of specified diet plans eliminating processed foods.
2/ From an environmental damage perspective, plants are clearly worse. Not only does animal-based agriculture not required pesticides and notably soil carbon sequestration increases w/ grazing. Making it impossible that cows are emitting carbon...…
3/ "...scientists think they can see the moment when rice production took off in Asia, about 5,000 years ago, because methane concentrations—recorded in tiny bubbles of ancient air trapped in ice cores in Antarctica—rose rapidly."
Methane, explained
Cows and bogs release methane into the atmosphere, but it's by far mostly human activity that's driving up levels of this destructive greenhouse gas.
4/ Rice fields and biomass burning (all plant matter) outrank ruminants when combined. And fossil fuel consumption in transporting the delicious avocado from South America to Asutralia... Yeah. The plants are not better on methane either.
Biomass burning primarily means fossil fuels, I think. Combining burning and rice is arbitrary. What does burning have to do with eating plants? Raising cattle and other livestock is displacing other species.…
No, biomass burning is intentionally only modern plant matter, fossil fuels are separated in this report.
1/First off, I'd like to thank you for pulling together these articles. It shows you are interested in having a conversation, and not just trumpet your world views.
2/ I don't think you processed this article properly. It states that livestock are responsible for 7-18% of worldwide GHG emissions. The article focuses on the finishing stage but the majority of GHG are from other stages. Also 97% of current beef production uses the "bad" method
3/ And if we did switch to AMP grazing, we would have to double land use for finishing. AMP takes 0.67 ha for 500kg of beef the same area can produce 1606 kg of almonds.…
How much water is it going to take to produce all those almonds? IIRC CA already uses 10% of their water for existing almond production.
Go factor in how cows milk has 10x more calories now.
And makes awesome cheese.
"almost all water used in the production of milk is rainfall." Unlike growing almonds.
If you are truly concerned about water usage, you will never eat lettuce, or kale, or spinach, or bell peppers or apples or strawberries again because they produce so few calories per liter of water...
There are 590 calories in a litre of milk.… that 2 L of H2O/cal. It takes 82 litres H2O to make an apple, which has 72 calories. That's 1.1 L of H2O/cal. It takes 5,900 litres to make a 0.25 lb of beef (216 cal) that's 27.3 L/cal. Veggies are more efficient
Yes, eating apples is a far more efficient way to get type 2 diabetes, vs eating beef. Calories are not fungible.
What about almonds?
There are more human consumable calories in that much beef than almonds.
4/ Also from this article, AMP takes 13 kg of feed to produce 1 kg of beef. With increasing beef production comes increasing deforestation (relevant figure on page 11)…
So I'm clear, there hasn't been a single study that is valid in your eyes? Doesn't that strike you as odd?
None of them explicitly test meat and control for the rest of the diet. So they are highly confounded.
Our small intestine is "designed" to eat plants? Nuh-uh. It's "designed" (as in better suited) for maximum absorption from nutrient-dense bioavailable sources (i.e. meat). A gorilla's innards are "designed" to digest plant material, hence the ginormous digestive tract.
Sometimes obvious ain't so obvious. The human body is insanely complex. Turning nutrition into a bright line religious crusade helps no one (vegans, keto, carnivore, breatharians, etc.) No matter where you stand, "What The Health" is "What The Ridiculous Garbage" scientifically.
Care to shed some more light on that last part? Been meaning to look into it for a while.
I totally agree about the religious crusade. The thing I hate about vegans is that they generally act like jerks. When people find out that I'm vegan, you can see the look in their eye, "Oh god, he's going start yelling at me." I have friends that don't even use the word vegan.
I also agree "What the Health" is a problematic movie. However I know it is accessible and is a starting point for more info. There is some good science in the movie among the bad. You take what good you can, just like anything in life.
(Possibly sensitive)
Yes, it has been linked, but there is no evidence that meat causes heart disease. Humans evolved to eat meat. It's stupid to claim we are herbivores.
Who told you that? You been lied to. Our digestive system is far more like a canine's-- very strong stomach acid, very short large intestine. We're meat eaters dude.
Herbivores use gut bacteria to ferment cellulose into usable nutrients. Humans have this ability to a very small degree, which is why beans give you gas, but not enough for plants to be a primary food sources.... at least not without consuming dangerous levels of carbohydrates.
If that were true why did the 2019 Canada food guide recommend eating plants as much as possible? You don't need to eat meat. I'd be dead if I did. So would 6% of the US population. We would have heard about that.
The Canada Food Guide is about 30 years behind the science regarding the nutritional & environmental impact of meat.
I never said you can't survive without meat. But I don't want to just survive. I want to thrive. To do that over the long term, we need meat. The types of plants that humans are able to digestare relatively rare in nature.
We evolved to make use of them during the short periods they're in season each year, but never in human history have they been the primary source of energy or nutrients. There have, however, been many cultures throughout history that have thrived on a diet of almost entirely meat
Our teeth and intestines length indicate that we are meant to eat plants, not meat. You couldn’t eat a cow with just your teeth. You’d need a knife. I appreciate the respect you’ve shown to someone you disagree with though.
And you! Name calling gets us nowhere. I enjoy hearing views different than my own.
He doesn’t really say that to be honest. If we were to argue this point - a sausage isn’t going to be they healthy, but a plain beef burger made with high quality beef is going to be quite nutritious if not a little high on saturated fats.
He strongly implies it. It would have been much easier to say “FYI: don’t eat burgers or sausages, not even plant based ones.” Which I would have agreed with.
I think you should re-evaluate your position. Meat has the highest nutrient density of anything we can eat, not to mention a lack of anti-nutrients. There's no single bite of plant-based anything that will have the same density and lack of anti-nutrients (like oxalates).
To eat meat we have to exploit and kill other animals, though.
To eat, we have to exploit and kill other animals, though. There, fixed it for you.
Why is nutrient density important? Why is avoiding "anti-nutrients" important? Exercise damages our body and releases waste products into the blood stream. By the same logic you are using, no one should exercise. I doubt you hold that position.
Why important? A lack of nutrient density means you will eat more calories to achieve nutrient goals. Why do you think the country is obese? Their metabolism says eat until goals are met, but it's all empty calories. Why avoid anti-nutrients? Kidney stones/lack of absorption etc
Saturated fats are good/healthy energy dense. Heart health hypothesis has been discredited.
I think he's just arguing that highly processed, unresearched food should have us asking more questions than we are? I'm not eating the meat either, but meat alternatives are a weird and sometimes scary market.
Agree. When people switch their eating habits and eat fake versions of what they were eating before, they aren’t making themselves healthier. People need to realize the burgers/cakes/etc. were the problem, not the things in them.
True. People are switching to fake meat because they want to eat “vegetarian/vegan” due to health related reasons and not due to environmental reasons. So making the switch doesn’t do any good.
How researches are those sausages?
Is it? That’s the exact question I ask myself - what’s better, for my health and for the environment: a beef hurger or one of these things. And I’m really not sure yet.
There is no law saying you have to eat burgers of any type. The billions of $$ of burger related advertising just strongly suggests that you eat burgers. That advertising is federally subsidized thanks to meat industry lobbying.
I like burgers. My kid likes burgers. Burgers are delicious. Beyond Meat and Impossible burgers are surprisingly good. We’re going to continue eating burgers, so the question is which is better overall to eat.
Keep feeding your kids real food. You want to experiment with yourself and fake foods go ahead. Don’t experiment on your kids
What's crazy is believing that meat is bad for you
Hamburger patties are just pre-cut meat. There's nothing in a hamburger patty that wasn't there before you ground it, and there's nothing removed from it in the grinding.
You’d rather eat a beyond meat burger than an all natural beef burger that is nothing but beef? That’s what’s crazy!
Impossible is definitely more innovative. But a recent article fawning over the company didn’t seem to mind that Leghemoglobin was being produced at a secret location with a secret process. Simplest explanation: Trade Secret. But then, there’s Theranos...
💯💯💯🙌🙌🙌 What looks healthy isn't always healthy and people need to learn to read ingredients.
It's not only about health though is it? 'Natural meat' is the result of a systematic and industrialized torture houses for animals. Lab-grown meat would stop all that. I agree with your over all point on health, but there are other angles to consider also.
Before you continue, read the ingredients, there are unknowns and no one knows what the long term consequences will be in the human body. You cannot say the same about real beef.
I said I agree that this is a health risk. What I'm saying is that it is a mistake to reduce the debate on lab-grown meat on just health. Lab-grown meat is cruelty free. 'Real beef' is the result of systematic torture of animals. Surely that has to be factored in.
The health risk are unknowns and have to be taken seriously.
His argument is in favor of humans living a healthy and long life Your argument is that animal care is more important than humanity’s health Your point isn’t comparable to his He’s attacking companies that say they’re healthy when they’re not You want animals treated better
I don't mean animal's health is more important than human health. Processed meat is classified as a Class I Carcinogenic, while red meat is class II. It's hardly healthy › features › cancer-r... But the company definitely shouldn't make false claims.
Promote health. Save lives. Serve the vulnerable.
The link went to the main page. From my understanding, his argument wasn’t that real meat is better but that this, promoted as healthy, processed food, is not healthy. You’re using an argument for A that’s actually for B. Comparing Apples to Oranges.
why do you think mainstream media is avoiding any type of critical analysis on the ingredients in fake meat?
Because preventative care isn’t profitable
Hit the nail on the head there!!
Spiciest response of the day
Exactly. And also because the anti-meat mob will go berserker if anyone has the audacity to question their wokeness.
I would recon there’s a large enough population that wants these products *or* their predecessors to succeed given the huge climate consequences of producing meat, and because of this most journalists are solely covering these positive aspects and not other negative ones. Maybe?
Because we have very good competent health writers on the biochemical level.
Jesus h Christ, you could replace 'the ingredients in fake meat' with just about anything these days...
short that chemical shitstorm to zero
Anyone in these comments plan on doing some basic math to see that there’s probably ~1 tablespoon of oil in 1 burger? Reading things like this that pass as intelligent are so frustrating; this is idiotic.
So you wouldn't mind one tablespoon of poison then?
My understanding this that these burgers are lower in saturated fats than meat.
Saturated fat is not bad for you. This is a myth pumped by the crisco salesmen.
saturated fat is a leading cause of heart disease which is one to the top killers in the US right?
american heart association says it does. I'm open to either option (body is complex and consensus around these things often changes) but I would need a better source than the British Journal of Sports Medicine
Well, you're welcome to look it up yourself, I'm not anyone's personal Googler.
sorry that's not what I was implying. I did look it up and consensus seems to be that saturated fat is a leading cause of heart disease
Awesome thread. Thanks for sharing!.
check out this thread.
Interesting. I was intrigued by BYND for awhile but will definitely steer clear.
You now realize filet tastes too good anyways. ;)
Ohh the ways you’ve changed me 😘 🥩
Fake food is the right term. Saving animals at the cost of human health. Better way to do that would be veggies plants.
What’s with all of you against real meat? It’s the original human diet since the beginning. It’s not like anything has changed for the better eating processed foods look at the health issues in the states it speaks for itself. All you need is another fake food source. Please
Nice! The processed nature of their products is massively downplayed. But the only question that matters is 'is their fake burger more healthy than a real burger?' Do they have stats on those?
Even if it's just as unhealthy, you also have to take into account the ecological effect
Growing cattle for beef is 2x to 10x more resource intensive than equivalent plant protein, I can look up the stats if you're interested.
Appreciate the info and look forward to the follow up
Just curious if you are shorting $BYND or any other financial incentives regarding this topic?
Unfortunately this might be a situation where “being early is the same as being wrong”, financially.
see tweetstorm coming later today :)
Interesting comments but..... Definite bias here on 2 levels, wants to (already is?) short the stock and also shills for “Bone Broth” company! Mmmmm yum......not!🤢 So take comments with a grain of NaCl! sorry Sodium Chloride!(Wow even salt sounds scary when I put it that way!)😜
These beyond meat burgers are beyond unhealthy.
I could agree more. Eat healthy and moderate amounts of real organic and sustaible meats and seafood like @greensbury
They also cook them on the same grill as the meat patties (for the same reason you don’t wash cast iron cookware)
As a vegetarian since 9 y, something close to meat is not an attraction. Nothing beats a fresh broccoli (no, really). Taste gets to be educated, not fooled for something else, this is manipulation not education.
Cheers to education but you lost me at broccoli 😃
Neither should be considered ‘heath food’ but they’re changing the conversation and meant to show carnivores that you can get your ‘meat fix’ once in a while. And that’s not such a bad thing is it?
Prem, Defining it as a “fix” implies addiction. Do you have a reference to any controlled studies that show non-processed meat consumption having addiction-like body chemistry responses? I’m interested in non-moralistic papers and references
Feel like the “benefit” is in reduced ecological implications from beef farming and not so much healthier for our bodies. But no one is trying to dispel the latter misperception.
Ground beef is made from the scraps left behind after the steak, etc is removed...not one cow less will be raised...this frankenfood, at best, will only increase landfill waste if the butchers can sell the ground beef..and maybe the price of a prime t-bone will go up...
Just eat more vegetables.
And have a big fat juicy steak with them.
Seems bigoted to imply that trans fat is less healthy than cis fat.
Real beef patties are cocktails of lard (worse than vegetable oil by leagues), blood (what a surprise), pus and antibiotics (what a surprise) and animal protein which has been proven to cause all sorts of gastrointestinal issues and haemorrhoids. Everything is relative.
All of that is wrong.
This tweet is a cocktail of misinformation. It would be like saying the human body is just made of lard and blood.
Lard is porcine and while we may think or feel that some people are pigs, biology says otherwise... 🐖
I just can’t...
Check your facts, neither of these patties contain trans fats. And did you compare that with red meat? Putting things out of perspective and taking a shit on them is the trademark sign of misinformation and ignorance.
Lastly as a founder of a bone broth company you clearly have a vested interest and bias. Therefore your tweetstorm is just propaganda and nothing else. These 2 companies were founded to drastically reduce the environmental impact of animal agriculture, which nobody can refute.
A single step away from Soylent Green.
now do factory farmed red meat...
Now do bacon....
“If man made it, don’t eat it.” ~ Jack LaLanne
But men grow cows and make them into patties
This is so misinformed, I like your enthusiasm but please research more. 1.This burger is much healthier than a meat based burger that is subsidized and highly processed as well as having hormones and additives (pink slime anyone?). 2.Meat destroys our land and wastes our water.
3. Pressed canola oil is fine. Solvent based extraction and high heat is not... 4. Oil is not bad for you, oil extracted under high heat with solvents is...
This is super interesting, will be watching to see if anything comes out of it.
I recently learned that omega-6 oil is converted to trans fats when heated. The gov’t guidelines say to eliminate trans fats.
6. GMOs will save our planet and save billions of lives. Scientific consensus is 100% in favor of GMOs, there is no issue here.
Whenever you hear scientific consensus is a 100% - thats a sign its most likely not.
7. What? Meat is incredibly foreign. It is a protein from another being with foreign hormones, blood, everything.Evolution never solved meat eating and longevity in humans because most died young before even reaching their 50s.
Field Roast has the best ingredient profile (assuming wheat gluten). Pea protein isolate is an adequate replacement. You are correct on seed oils - stay away! Unrefined olive or coconut only. Don’t like that Impossible switched to soy. Need to do more research.
8-10 baseless claimes 11. I dont think you understand the impact of human meat consumption on the planet. You are literally saving human lives by funding research in the field by paying for this burger (increasing demand). Its the first iteration of a tasty plant based burger...
Precautionary Principle, Iatrogenics, Lindy are all against them. I would not feed it to my enemies...
Biggest takeaway here is how little we know about the human body. I did keto for 6 months but stopped recently as it became clear that pinning my long term health on something doctors aren’t even close to agreeing on isn’t the solution.
Interesting. I'd say as long as you're doing keto and eating whole real foods it should be totally safe and kosher. I'm more concerned about processed foods than any one type of eating that is based on real whole foods
Agree on that but the topic of whether hardcore carb avoidance is a positive or negative is certainly up for debate in the medical community
You get a lot of carbs from veggies and other keto friendly items, do you not?
Depends how you define keto. Strict keto by definition is very low carb. So no, you don’t get a lot of carbs if ketosis is the goal.
Right. Not sure permanent starvation of reserves is a healthy goal. For weight loss it makes a lot of sense. Bet it’s net effect on blood pressure and cholesterol is beneficial too despite the high fat content.
Yeah that was my conclusion. But it was surprising to me how divided cardiologists and other medical professionals were on the topic of carbs, cholesterol, etc.
Great discussion. Consider if you don’t need a cardiologist if that maes them happy.
Well how’d you feel after six months of low/no carbs?
If man made it, don't eat it.
see this thread
Never mind just noticed you'd retweeted it 😄
Cultured meat is what we need - not this junk.
Please share with the cal soy boys and yogis.
I can’t tell if this thread is a joke or not.
Just put some Velveeta on the Beyond burger, tastes just like the real thing.
Aren't there studies showing red meat to be carcinogenic and increasing risk of heart disease? Not that the absolute health of replacements shouldn't be looked into
Please post this thread on that beyond meat post they keep bombarding on everyone’s timeline
Fair point on Beyond Meat, but I think it's misleading to throw Impossible Foods under the bus as a "trans fat purveyor" when your best argument against it is "Wall Street guy thinks GMOs are bad"
Not from the most objective source. Guy founded a company in the beef business
what's new? take something natural, ape it with a dose of trans-fats, preservatives, sugar and/or salt and call it food. cc @PeterAttiaMD
Did you see the study on the amount of pesticides contained in Impossible Food and Beyond Meat burgees? They are basically pesticide burgers.
Can you share that link?
Wait but the majority of our meat sources consume pesticides... don’t they?
Tweetstorm Sponsored By: Tyson Foods, Beef Products Inc, and North American Meat Institute #ad
I don't know why, but this tweet reminds me of the video that made Juicero shut down.
this seems relevant.
yep. fantastic thread
I think people underestimate how 'robust' livestock make our food supply. Last year we raised field peas and a heat wave destroyed the crop. While there are stories from the dust bowl where people fed tree leafs to cows and had nurtutious milk.
seems like a very big stretch...processed yes. equivalent to trans fats no.
I believe it’s an analogy
Vs red meat which causes heart disease cancer diabetes lol
Is trans fat good or bad? Since when?
This is a Badass tweet storm! Welcome back!
Totally agree. On a serious note you just f*ed a lot of cattle out there!
The points you make are news to me but it makes sense that a completely fabricated food would be highly processed. On the flip side if I’m at a burger joint I’m going with these options as a healthier alternative to mass-produced beef. I don’t eat a lot of oil so should be ok.✌️
My assessment of your in depth analysis is Impossible > Beyond. I’d rather avoid the known health risk (Canola oil) vs. The unknown known (GMO) as there’s no evidence to support the second argument. I appreciate the insights though. I will make more informed office lunches now.🤘
We’re in a huge experiment with GMOs right now. And probably no way to know if future health problems will be related. I feel like in some cases, when you splice corn with Roundup, that can’t be good. When you make a jalapeño not so hot, is that GMO horrible? Not so clear.
True, but thousands if not more products are GMO. They (I hope) go through rigorous approvals. Why avoid a veggie burger when you’ll buy a tomato that’s been through the same process? I’m serious. You could buy a GMO cucumber tomorrow and not know it. What’s the diff?
That was my point. How is it modified? And what are the genes spliced with? That is what is not clear. I try to avoid them, but there is really no way to.
But we all are subjected to it everyday unless the FDA or whoever mandates markings on all our produce.
Agreed. And it's sad that we can't get that information on the food we produce. It's bad enough we don't know where are drugs are being produced...but that is a whole 'nother convo!
There is no Prāna in this food
Most of these concerns are speculative or dubious, but regardless people are not eating Beyond Burgers for, like, every meal. If we're going to make "vegetable oil" a bogeyman, ok, but that concern would be in no way relegated to the fake meat industry.
I mean, "jury is out" on the health impact of many, many foods, not least of all red meat.
Nobody who eats these burgers thinks they are healthy. The companies don't "tout" health benefits. And they are replacing red meat, which the UN put on a level with nicotine and alcohol for cancer risks
careful now. ethics and humaneness aside, your statement on cancer risk is pretty loaded. dig deeper and you'll see the "dangers" are not evidenced to be the same.
Very insightful and interesting. Thank you. What's your opinion on lab-grown meat? Like @_SuperMeat_
What veggie burger do you consider the healthiest of them all? In my experience, every other frozen patty is not fun to eat compared to BM and IF. Any thoughts on Hodo Tofu veggie burgers?
At least no lives were lost in the process of making the burger? That feels like a plus!
if the human health downsides outweigh the animal life tradeoff, sure. doesn't work with my ethical systems, but not entirely sure i'm right either.
It’s a hard value judgment to make I agree. I try to remember that just because they don’t speak our language doesn’t mean they aren’t deserving of the same treatment.
i recommend not reading about plant neurobiology then. things get real weird -… and yeah - i just take issue with people thinking these things are healthy. i'm all for a sustainable ag system that treats animals well, and vote that way with my $$
The Intelligent Plant
Scientists debate a new way of understanding flora.
I think the argument should be that they aren’t anymore unhealthy than various other foods you may eat, but are the only ethical way to eat “meat”.
Eating animal meat is not unhealthy. Like most things that we have naturally done as humans and the animal food chain, it’s natural. Eating processed foods is almost always unhealthy both short and long term.
read this thread
Just replace your burger patty with a giant slice of tomato. And nix the bun. Healthy burger! You’re welcome. 🍔❌ 🍅✅
I eat both of these a lot because they taste good and I like them. I'm very healthy. You're the founder of a bone broth company and keto supplement company, of course you'd object to vegetable based meats for boneheaded and unfounded reasons.
Feel free to reply with any specific rebuttals to my statements instead of name calling
Because of all of the health and cognitive benefits of bone broth, boneheaded is no longer considered name calling. I was calling you a brain genius.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see American Heart Association recommends Beyond Meat. They love canola oil and vegetable oil.
Pea protein & canola oil being worse for health (& environment & ethics) than beef... Thanks for the lolz.
And i was keen to try one. Curious could these non meal burgers be popular in vegi india? Notwithstanding the price and canola oil!
Almost no vegetable content. “Pea protein isolate” is NOT a vegetable. Would bet most folks think they are eating a veggie burger. They are not.