The burger is made primarily from Soy. Soy accounts for 2/3 of global protein feed. Humans eating directly from livestock's primary food source is likely to be much more efficient at a global scale.
This article recommends no more than 20% soy in cattle’s diet. The article is from last year. [1]
>Researchers have found that when the oil content of the ration exceeds 7 percent, it can be toxic to the microbes in the cattle’s rumen and decrease digestibility. Too much oil in cattle rations will lead to scours (diarrhea), cessation of rumen fermentation and, eventually, death.
“Because of these limitations, the recommended upper limit of feeding would be about 20 percent of the ration,” Hoppe says. “Practical feeding levels are probably more like 2 to 3 pounds per head per day. At this low rate of supplementation, soybeans provide an excellent source of protein and energy.”
[1]https://www.drovers.com/article/soybeans-may-be-viable-cattl...
It is not feasible for a farmer to buy feed during the lifetime of the animal. It’s the reason they have huge pastures for grazing during warm months. During winter they are usually fed hay.
All beef is grass fed period. Some are finished at the end with corn or other dense grains (your soy patties).
Here’s an article from a Meat Scientist.
https://meatscience.org/TheMeatWeEat/topics/raising-animals-...
Mad cow disease propagates from feeding cows the ground up bits of other infected cows.[0]
[0]https://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/resourcesforyou/animalh...
[1]https://www.cdc.gov/prions/bse/bse-north-america.html
[2]https://www-m.cnn.com/2013/07/02/health/mad-cow-disease-fast...
Visit the Harrison Ranch (on I-5, south-east of SF), and see for yourself how they're treated.
Where I think meat has an advantage is that "we" don't need to use energy to make the patty taste good, the cow does that naturally using the feed. But a soy patty needs all sorts of things added to it and we need to use energy and water to actively process it into something edible.
If we were just eating the soya beans as we pulled them out of the ground, it would be far more sustainable. But beef tastes great right off the cow! Soya is quite bland.
This may be the current case, but it doesn't, indeed shouldn't, be so. It just happens that in the US, CAFO's are the best (financially) way to raise beef cattle.
In any case, livestock's primary food source should never have been soy beans.
...you would have to consume impossible amounts for the smallest of effects
Further, phytoestrogens actually benefit humans
"You shouldn't worry about this because phytoestrogens aren't present"
"You shouldn't worry about this because phytoestrogens are beneficial"
Both can be true at once, and support the end argument, it's just not particularly helpful or harmful if both are true at the same time.
Whereas drinking cow's milk, for example, is high in estrogen because its from it comes from a large female after giving birth.
The FUD being spread around soy is ridiculous.
Other nutrients that tend to be harder to find in plants than animals also tend to be more poorly absorbed than their animal counterparts. B12, iron, d, zinc, etc.
Also, quantity matters. Plants might produce a lot more than mammals do.
In any case, the breast growth on males is no joke. That is just the affect on adults, who are far less susceptible than babies. However it works, soy is a serious hazard and should have the GRAS (generally recognized as safe) status removed.
[1]https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Shourong_Shi/publicatio...