EU lawmakers push to ban term 'veggie-burger' | Hacker News Reader

EU lawmakers push to ban term 'veggie-burger'

reuters.com

27 pointsr929578 comments

Some food labelling is misleading. One example I have seen ist (small) "veggie" (big) "CRISPY CHICKEN".

But burger? Sure, burgers are often beef, but there have always been other kinds. "Chicken burger", "crab burger", so why not "veggie burger".

The EU likes making regulations, to the point that they are killing their own industry

The problem is that on the packaging Burger will be written with huge letters and then vegan is metioned somewhere in a corner. I bought cheese that was not cheese :)) Imagine my disappointment.

So maybe we should tackle the root cause somehow instead?

That is what they are doing here. Its less work for the few people who wanna call it veggie burger to change than for everyone else to change.

> [x] will be written with huge letters and then [y] is metioned somewhere in a corner

I don’t understand how banning a specific term will address this general case.

this is exaggerated - at least in my region.

Example: https://www.ruegenwalder.de/website/produkte/vegan/2491/imag...

Vegan cheese packaging:

https://verbund.edeka/verbund/presse/eigenmarken-portal/my-v...

https://www.verbraucherzentrale-bremen.de/sites/default/file...

Plus, usually dedicated/labelled sections and optical separation in the supermarket:

https://www.deutschlandistvegan.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/0...

https://preview.redd.it/k%C3%B6nnen-wir-das-vegane-angebot-v...

In your example it says “with soy protein” which seems to imply that soy protein is used in conjunction with the chicken type. And the text is smaller so it makes it seem like maybe they augment a smaller portion with soy, like ethanol used in E10 benzin.

Granted, it is rather obvious in Germany as you said because those foods are most typically purchased from a section dedicated to them and not mixed with others.

But the point I’m making is that even your example image was not clear.

> In your example it says “with soy protein” which seems to imply that soy protein is used in conjunction with the chicken type. And the text is smaller so it makes it seem like maybe they augment a smaller portion with soy, like ethanol used in E10 benzin.

but obviously not chicken augmented with soy

Only obvious based on context and prior knowledge.

But there are a lot of folks without that knowledge.

what knowledge and context do you miss specifically on the packaging?

Well, guess you learned a valuable lesson: always read packaging because corporations will go to any length to deceive you.

Or just make it illegal, that is less work overall.

Ooc what did you mean by 'their own' industry? The industry of making regulations or the food industry?

I read it as general industry within the EU.

> so why not "veggie burger".

1. even this will be illegal

2. why not: there are countless of vegetarian Burger types, one of them is one in the style of crispy chicken burgers - without meat

This move will expand the public's belief that regulation means "a ridiculous incursion of rights," leading to greater belief that society is better off without regulation.

So a net positive.

I'd call it a net negative. A lot of regulations are straight up good - clean drinking water, food safety, no sketchy chemicals in clothes, electric appliances that don't catch on fire, the GDPR, consumer protections etc etc are all unequivocally good things.

Things like this bring the very useful tool of regulations into disrepute.

No regulations is a fast-track to the megacorp dystopia, sadly... No regulations means no incentive to care about the actual living people

Any legislative body that sees fit to weigh in on such minutia ought not to be legislating.

"Veggie burger" as a term has been in common usage by the public long before any of the other words that convey the same thing.

It depends, its a war between the right to know what you are eating without studying it thoroughly first and the right to claim things as something that they are not.

In Europe people tend to be the first kind and see the government as tool for protecting them from the second kind.

The revolution is unlikely.

Do you think "veggie burger" suggests it is something that it is not?

Veggie burger is the flashy headline that makes you click stuff. What actually is happening is that they are creating a framework for stricter definitions(for many things, like sausages) that will be adopted by 27 countries in 24 different languages.

The "veggie burger" can be in the text of Malta or Ireland but who knows. They are talking about protecting some words. There are so many languages in EU, everyone calls these things differently. There's something similar against calling things not made from dairy milk or yogurt.

Vegans are infuriated apparently, maybe they can join forces with the libertarians and topple the EU so they can fight among themselves in peace.

The article suggests that the voting public, at least the agriculture involved bits, were interested in having this passed.

There is a long history of legal use of words about what foods are. Like what you are allowed to call 'butter' or 'beer'. There's also the regional names like parmesan and champagne. This looks like its following that established norm.

Like Parmesan and Champagne, would you advocate that a beef patty is not a “hamburger” unless it was pressed in the “Hamburg” region of Germany?

Yeah but like Hamburger is not from Hamburg though... Maybe you could say Hamburg steak or something but Hamburgers as we know them almost certainly originated in the US.

I don't think accurate food labeling is a bad thing but the contension shouldn't really be around burger to me that's just a pressed shape of cruft but the veggie part. Because Veggie I feel like implies vegatable but like soy-protein or bean mush or impossible burger all could be classified as a veggie burger but like they are very different things and have very different additives. I don't think we are crushing people or industry by trying to accurately label foods though.

I do think that the protectinism to regional foods confusing though. It would be interesting if you could make "feta" elsewhere than in greece for example, but maybe like the originating countries could get a special sigil rather than an exclusively protected food name when its basically indistingusiable to all but a connoisseur.

The butter is my favorite exemple: peanut butter, cacao butter, Vitellaria butter…

"What food are" actually refer to what people use that word for and not necessarily what is the strict scientific definition. I’m sure most knows what’s a "plant burger", although I concede the current law is confusing as you can call an egg or diary many based patty as such.

In the US, a meaningful fraction of the "Regulation bad" people are also in the "Ban fake meat" camp soo....

They might just not have consistent political opinions?

Clearly though, these should be sold as "Sparkling vegetable patty"

> The EU has already defined dairy items milk, butter, cream, yoghurt and cheese as "products secreted by mammary glands"

I think they should just label things more explicitly like this - accelerate veganism 100x when people in the supermarkets have to choose between “pressed soybeans” and “mammary gland secretions”.

So are they going to change the name of peanut butter? Coconut milk? Neither are secretions of mammary glands

Monkey nut paste and big hairy ball juice, obviously.

We're going to see more ridiculous overreach like this as alternatives to meat consumption get more popular. (I say ridiculous because no one is getting confused by "veggie-burger")

> The EU has already defined dairy items milk, butter, cream, yoghurt and cheese as "products secreted by mammary glands", meaning that what might otherwise be called oat milk is instead generally referred to as oat drink.

Meanwhile, back in 1755:

> MILK. n.s. [meelc, Saxon; melck, Dutch.]

> 2. Emulsion made by contusion of seeds.

> Pistachoes, so they be good and not musty, joined with almonds in almond milk, or made into a milk of themselves, like unto almond milk, are an excellent nourisher.

I love strict product labeling rules and laws. Thanks to those kinds of regulations, people like my mom can buy stuff knowing that it won't hurt them unexpectedly. I'm frustrated with the status quo of being able to say "100% real chicken" in your 50% by weight chicken nuggets. It pisses me off that saying "gluten free" on products that should never contain gluten improves sales, and I find that a poor excuse to allow that. I'm tired of all the puffery that claims in big bold letters "Best product" and then in a tiny print somewhere else "compared to a fake product we only ran in a small community to invent this accolade"

Unfortunately, this "article" provides zero actual information. No actual text of what was voted on. No context for when or where "veggie burger" is supposedly banned.

So great, can't find out if there might be nuance to this issue, can't find out any arguments, can't even find the actual words which were voted on. Oh, actually looks like this was a vote for an amendment? No actual law has been voted on yet.

That has not stopped anyone here from makings broad and sweeping generalizations, as usual.

Vegetables are delicious. I wish vegan options would lean into this instead of trying to be fake meat. IMO grilled mushrooms are tastier than grilled goop pressed into burger form.

So its the right move because you dont like the taste of something?

It’s more about it being fake when they are delicious by themselves. Vegetables don’t need improvement, they are already respectable.

I think the idea just bothers me, “vegetables aren’t good enough, what you really want is fake meat.”

Two different things. If you don’t want to eat animal products for ethical reasons but you want something high protein and/or similar in taste/texture to a beef burger, eating a vegetable stir fry isn’t going to cut it. That’s what these products are for.

Some of modern vegetarianism in the West has involved reinventing familiar entrees to make them vegetarian. A lot of those efforts really have been disappointing.

I'd encourage new vegetarians to try embracing vegetarian staples from places like India, where culinary traditions have a lengthy proven history of supporting healthy and satisfying vegetarianism.

But I'd also say, some veggie burgers really are great. They taste good, they're satisfying, and nobody is deceived when they read "veggie burger" on the menu. This regulation is nonsense. It's just telling vegetarians that their linguistic tradition around their diets -- part of their cultural heritage -- is now banned in the EU.

That’s interesting. Which ones have you tried? I go to a vegan BBQ regularly but have found the burger options lackluster and visually unsettling vs just getting grilled veggies.

I’d try more if you have recommendations. I think I hit all the major players though.

Edit: I noticed you were downvoted and just want to advocate for you. I don’t know why people have such reactions to reasonable discussions :/ If you’re reading this I want you to know I appreciate your comment and I hope you aren’t discouraged from sharing in the future.

I usually prefer the ones made primarily from beans. The ones I prefer are usually made by the restaurants themselves.

Grilled mushrooms aren't exactly the nutritional equivalent though. I'd much rather be eating grilled lentil paste if it's my main course.

My point exactly, eating fake meat it only fooling oneself.

So many delicious dishes from world regions where being a vegetarian is the norm.

people obviously want fake meat/burgers without actual meat, even if you don't

People also want ultra processed food. I wouldn’t advocate a ban for any of these things—I eat them too—but it seems reasonable to want less focus on them and hope that companies could innovate or market other options.

The marketing and availability impact behavior.

I found that mostly people who are opposed to the existence of these products per se are proponents of this ban.

> a regulation designed to give farmers a stronger negotiating position

Honestly, this feels like a smoke and mirrors done ahead of Mercosur agreement enrollment which may put European farmers especially the smaller ones on lost position facing competition from South America.

Personally, as someone who is primarily vegetarian, I agree with this prohibition.

I've found it very annoying for years when a veggie food shop calls it's products "veggie chicken nuggets" and the like.

Not only is it annoying that they use meat product names to market veggie products, but more importantly it also obscures the actual ingredients of the product.

I am always reminded of the Yes minister "The Emulsified High-Fat Offal Tube" joke which is close to 40 years old now (https://youtu.be/sPwQ0PmK9lw?si=aOvPYUpJcsw8g_kN&t=68). The EU has a very long history of standardize food names, with the natural result that some stuff get forced to change their name.

One of my favorite of such thing is that there seem to be a rule dictating that if you have something called strawberry juice, it has to have strawberries in them. Once I got to the store and the name on one kind of bottle was "Strawberry inspired taste", which made me laugh quite badly.

Problem here is that the excessive focus on secondary issues raises the perception of a problem solving deficit which reduces support/legitimacy for the political system.

It would be nice to focus on solving more existential problems of which there are enough.

"Because this is the most urgent matter at hand, dad?" -My 14 year old daughter.

As an inveterate “get off of my lawn” crabby person, I can get behind this.

I tilt against the windmills of the “vegetarian omelette”.

I saw "vegetarian rice" made out of Basmati rice last month - a clear marketing ploy to grab particular customers but my brain got mental fart and I wondered for a few seconds amused "as opposed to what - meat based rice?"

Heresy!

They'll be coming for the sausage next

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=yes+minister+euro+sausage&ia=...

While this seems ridiculous I do wish fast food places in particular would be specific what they're selling - is your veggie burger some vegetables/beans in a crispy coating, or a textured thing trying to emulate meat? I've never eaten meat and don't want the latter.

This sort of thing would be comical if it weren't so blatantly and corruptly protecting meat producers. The reason the term evolved is because it works well in meaning. You don't have to like veggie burgers to see what's going on.

Let the verbal gymnastics commence. Or maybe places should start naming veggie burgers after the EU governance in satire?

Well better they spend time on this sort of stuff than say chat control. (Not that I am not supporter as meat eater...)

This reminds me of the ongoing problem with products being labeled "natural."

The EU is a champion of consumers rights as usually applauded on HN. Seems exactly what they are doing here: to avoid misleading or confusing naming practices.

This is ridiculous. A burger is a construct.

Sure, you can't call a veggie patty a beef patty, but how does the meat industry own the word burger?

This is classic right wing identity politics. They are so obsessed with silly labels - is there nothing more important to deal with?

Double-plus good.

Food safety and food traditions protections is one of the few areas in which EU are actually good.

Unsure what either of those have to do with this law

Hamburger is somewhat traditional food. So it makes sense to be regulated as such - to not be able to name any crap hamburger, but only specific crap hamburger. One that is beef patty inside a bun. Having a animal derived patty by grinding is essential part of some item being called hamburger.

I realize this may be satire (Poe's law and all). But I disagree 'hamburger' should get protected status, in anything except the exact quotation without clear prefix/suffix. "Vegetarian Hamburger" (in near-equal font pt) should be fine, Veggie-burger shouldn't even be up for debate imo.

If fine-print is confusing consumers maybe we should improve our labeling standards rather than protecting a food category not in need of protection.

I think that's reasonable regarding expectations, but the flip side is you can't make a vegan patty and call it 'vegan burger like patty'. The discussed regulation smells heavily of measures to protect the meat industry rather than the consumer who is absolutely able to discern between the classic and vegetarian alternatives.

How will it protect farmers? This won't change consumer habits one bit.

Why not? Consumers are more likely to give vegetarian products a chance when they are 'drop in' replacements. A 'vegetarian burger' instead of a 'burger' would sell better than a 'plant based patty'.

But plants also come from farms...

Cattle is more profitable.

When i buy a hamburger in the supermarket i dont get a bun. So clearly the thing i buy shouldnt be called a hamburger.

Also, its made from beef, why is it called HAMburger?! /s

But is it truly a hamburger if it's not from Hamburg?

Feel free to protect 'Hamburg-style Steak', but protecting 'burger' is stupid. Also very odd coincidence that the rise of vegetarian/vegan alternatives prompts the reaction, when nobody batted an eye at 'fish burger' or 'chicken burger'. I suppose that anything which promotes not murdering innocent animals is bad.

This is a ridiculous move. Its just the right-wing going Trump-like anti-woke owning the liberals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com