Mushrooms: coming soon to a burger near you
nature.com
nature.com
More than eating mushrooms, I think we should all spend some time to harvest mushrooms ourselves, assuming we know what we are doing!
I think the reason it's not more common is also that you tend to need to always go a little bit deeper in to the mountains or forest than you expected to find what you're looking for, which can turn off the more risk-averse among us.
We should all eat more mushrooms, not necessarily as a meat substitute, just in general. They can bring their own fantastic richness and flavor to so many dishes, if you venture beyond the boring white button mushrooms. At least go for portobellos or something, they're so much more interesting.
No really, I love mushrooms.
I started putting a tablespoon in my bowls of soups and stews. I liked the taste enough to keep putting on more until I put in a cup or two to the whole stew.
Growing mushrooms indoors on a commercial scale is very different than order an oyster kit or having a couple shiitake logs in your backyard. IMHO the mushroom that pairs best with beef is ishnoderma resinosum, and I'm not sure anyone even knows how to cultivate that.
Maybe it depends on the climate, here in the humid northern Europe, it's relatively simple to grow mushrooms on a commercial scale.
The common commercial white and brown button/portobello mushrooms (Agaricus campestris and Agaricus bisporus) are pretty easy to grow -- they've been cultivated at scale since the 1700s.
Others (such as oyster mushrooms and shiitake) aren't too much harder.
Unfortunately, the most prized species (truffles, morels) are more tricky. Commercial truffle cultivation does exist, but it's a roll of the dice. You inoculate your trees, then you pray. It's nothing like the large-scale factory model used for the Agaricus species.
With respect to morels, while several people over the years have claimed to have a process for cultivating them, no one (to my knowledge) has ever been successful at producing them on a commercial scale.
Virtually all morels are still harvested in the wild. That's a real pity, because they are worlds better than the Agaricus species.
They do have nice flavor and a good mix of calories though.
This study found increased immune system activity after the consumption of white button mushrooms for 1 week:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22113068
This study suggests that certain chemicals found in mushrooms might be helpful in combatting cardiovascular disease:
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/1475-...
The first part is not exactly right, and the second part is a pro.
And not having calories might be a good thing, but it doesn't make a food "nutritious".
That's true for most plants too. It's not like anyone advices eating only or mostly mushrooms, so that getting 100% of your vitamins from them becomes essential.
Plus, nutritional value is relative. Mushrooms are more nutritious than many of the kind of foods they can replace.
> "Still, mushroom cultivation is not a green panacea."
For one thing, they don't photosynthesize.
So what am I missing here? Substituting 1/4 of a burger with air shouldn't reduce calories by 1/3.
(maybe they are talking about the entire sandwich, in which case meat had a relatively lesser quantity of calories anyway?)
Sorry, bulimia doesn't sound fun to me.
Carbs have gotten an undeservedly bad rep, due to bro science. But there is still no actual proof of these assertions, only speculation.
Edit: Decided to grab a quick source online that seems pretty unbiased since this is can be a pretty heated and opinionated topic. Other more in depth sources exist, feel free to dig in https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/the-truth-abo...
Fats are calorie-dense, which is their primary danger (ignoring trans-fats here).
Simple carbs give you plenty of calories too, and basically nothing else.
People are quick to demonize all carbs, but it's only really the simple ones that are dangerous.
Whole carbs are generally fine in moderation, like everything else.
A lot of people are looking for foods they can binge on, with no guilty conscience, but no such food exists. It's not black/white, good/bad.
Vegetables. Raw.
I love veggies, but eating only raw veggies is absolute nonsense.
Nonsense, there's plenty of nutrition. Like you said, there's 500 calories, that's nutrition. There is also protein, calcium, vitamins (including B12) and other minerals. It's also very filling and satisfying, provided you eat good cheese, and not some "processed cheese product".
Regarding whole grain pasta, as far as I know, it's fine and healthier than normal pasta. It just tends to smell and taste like a wet burlap sack.
Obesity is a greater health risk (death risk) in the US than colorectal cancer.
The media feeds into to this, with the "fat bad carbs good fat good carbs bad protein superfood eat this don't eat that eat that don't eat this" nonsense.
Eat a varied diet, avoid added sugars and fats. Boom, 90% done.
What does 'bro science' mean? e.g. is the work referenced here bro science:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbs-against-car...
Btw, I think the thing that makes the meaty part of burgers a bit dodgy is the fact that the meat has been ground up which means that bacteria can grow throughout its bulk at fridge temperature. As opposed to other cuts of meat where such growth is initially confined to the surface. These organisms won't kill you but they do leave inflammatory waste products behind which are bad for the health of the consumer. Same with chopped onion and various other foodstuffs; dunno about mushrooms. Hence supermarket 'ready meals' which have been fridged for 7+ days are best avoided
UPDATE:
https://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/press/press-releases/2016/febr...
But there has been a tendency to demonize all carbs, just like there was demonization of fats in earlier decades. Both are wrong.
And no, I don't believe the "inflammatory waste products" theory, that's only one step removed from detox nonsense.
Yeah I would agree with that, however, I think the larger error is in ignoring people's relationship to food. Some people shows signs of addiction, some don't, and we have no idea what the difference is, because we don't understand addiction.
>And no, I don't believe the "inflammatory waste products" theory, that's only one step removed from detox nonsense.
Heh. Whether one believes in a theory or not has no bearing on whether it's true. The proper name for those inflammatory chemicals is 'Pamps' btw. It's peer-reviewed research from a UK university. More to the point there's a plausible (to me) explanation behind it, unlike a lot of biomedical science. So worth checking out.
Besides, there are plenty of reasons already for avoiding overly-processed food.
Word of mouth ideas about cause and effect, learned though informal testing in the gym rather than the lab. That's not to say there is widespread agreement about any/all of it. The contentious ideas are most likely to be called bro science. e.g. Google "brosplits."
As a rule of thumb, anytime 'bro' is used as a slight on hackernews, it's being used wrong (differently than anyone outside the computer nerd cirlce of the valley bubble uses it). I trash on bro science now and them, but the carbs thing was more of a society-wide meme that hit it's peak with the Atkins diet.
Actually, deserved or not, there was nothing of "bro" about what gave them the bad rep. Actual doctors, medical organizations, and dieticians have advised so, not some "bros". Like they did against fat before.
This is not using Nature to justify some human trend or cultural practice (which would have been a fallacy).
This is merely pointing out an evolutionary development that has existed for millions of years (and in humans for hundreds of thousands).
It’s a nasty and unfair thing to assume that when someone gets a burger, they’re “overdoing it” every time. Plenty of people have an occasional burger and just want beef, not filler. For people living in food deserts, and people poorly educated or just poor, how about giving their kids healthy and edible school food? How about heavily subsidizing healthier foods for people on food assistance, and going out of our way to make those options readily available? How about bringing back Home Ec?
You can't fix it effectively through changing the feed or livestock farming practices, you have to replace the beef with a fundamentally less harmful alternative.