Hacker News Reader

Comment by yaseer | Hacker News Reader

> they're usually far from natural (tons of chemicals)

I really object to marketing use of the word 'natural' and 'chemicals'. I don't mean to single you out - these concepts are widespread in marketing.

Plenty of 'natural' things are bad, like small pox, the Ebola virus and salmonella.

Plenty of 'unnatural' things are good, like antibiotics to treat infection.

All matter is made from chemicals. Whether a chemical like penicillin or salt is synthesised in a lab, or extracted from the ocean, holds no baring on whether that chemical is good for you.

- EDIT - Generalised the penicillin example.

View on HN

When it comes to food, I use the following criteria: could I make it myself in my kitchen? (Some "minimal processsing" like fermentation and curing therefore fall under "natural".)

I'm pretty sure the answer is "no" for most of the plant-based fake meat. It's also "no" for McDonald's burger so I'm not just hating on plants.

I understand this conversation is about Beyond Meat kinda stuff, but it's isn't no for the two oldest and most popular fake meats--tofu and seitan. And yet tofu especially gets beat up in terms of fake vs natural.

You can definitely make seitan in your kitchen, I am not disagreeing with anything you're saying though.

Tofu and seitan get "beat up" because (1) tofu is soy and seitan is gluten (many people dislike those, for various reasons), (2) they're often used to mimic (fake) meat, not made into creative meals of their own, and (3) for me personally, tofu is extremely bland.

As an omnivore, I love seitan - it's pretty common in Chinese and Japanese cuisine. I wish more vegetarian places in the US would use it, but it seems that only tofu has crossed over, which is a shame, because tofu generally doesn't have the texture and bulk of meat, but rather of soft, non-meltable cheese, and is not even as filling as that.

Lots of veg places in the US -do- use seitan. It may be your location that doesn't. It's very popular for vegan chicken sandwiches, fingers, wings, curries etc. I'm in LA tho which may be the current veg restaurant capital of the world.

It's definitely true highly processed foods correlate with poor health outcomes. This correlation is mainly because ultra-processed foods often contain added sugars, excess sodium, and unhealthy fats (source: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/processed-foods...).

There's an (open) question here of what the cause is; is this inherent to all food processing?, or is it the nutritional content of the food?

I would argue eating home-made potato chips, cookies and ice cream may lead to worse health outcomes than plant-based burgers with better nutritional benefits

I prefer the criteria "would a prehistoric person eat this?". Our bodies evolved with food you could pick off a plant and put in your mouth sometimes after applying heat. Or meat. This is "natural" food. Plenty of ingredients you buy in a modern store are processed like flour and sugar. You can make donuts in your kitchen and I'd call that one of the worst foods you can eat nutritionally.

I wouldn't say Penicillin is 'unnatural', there are probably better examples out there.

That's true, I just picked penicillin and salt intentionally as they both can be synthesised in a lab and in nature

Penicillin is a natural product of fungi against bacteria.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com