https://www.fastcompany.com/9116077...-fruits-legumes

But... if it's not meant to imitate meat any more, then why are they still calling them "sausages"?

They should be calling them vegetable tubes, or veggie logs, or almost anything that doesn't imply they're a substitute for a meat based food.

Why do they call oat or soy milk "milk"? It's not milk, at all.

Madison-avenue-speech.

IMO, they are just another ultra-processed frankenfood product.

Me? I wouldn't even try one to see if I liked it or not.

I thought we were to steer clear of ultra-processed foods.

Today I had a 100% grass fed hamburger that I grilled on lump charcoal (not briquettes) topped with KerryGold cheese and two strips of bacon. Yummmmmy, real food.

Why would I want a beyond-franken-burger? Soy bacon? Veggie-cheese, or anything else when I can have the real thing?

I rarely eat sausage, but when I do, you can bet I won't be eating Beyond-franken-sausage.

We mostly shop the perimeter of the grocery store, and maybe a couple of the isles when we want something specific.

I grind my own coffee beans. My tea comes in dried leaves, not dust in a bag. My peanut butter has one ingredient, organic peanuts. Sadly, my heavy whipping cream contains gellan gum. I can't find an organic brand without it. So I'm paying cream prices for gum. The nuts I eat are either raw or roasted in peanut oil. The simpler the ingredients, the better I like it.

There's a sucker born every minute, and that's what keeps both the Frankenfood and Medicine-For-Profit industries in their big bucks.

Just my opinion, of course.

Vegans obviously MISS real food. Because they are always eating processed imitations of animal foods.

The channel Vegan Deterioration often comments on how vegans are always seeking "new foods" and make outrageous claims on their food-processor creations that look like burgers or sausage.

If it worked, it would work. Just not a good life philosophy, eating contrary to species requirements.

And -- this is the part that frustrates me so -- they aren't helping animals. The level of processing and travel is dangerous to the planet, when sustainable practices locks up carbon and helps our situation.

They shouldn't be calling oat, almond, or soy milk "milk" either.

They should call it a "milk substitute", or an "alternative to milk", since that's what it is, and makes it much more clear to those who are allergic to milk that there is no milk in it.

These milk substitutes can be used in cooking and baking in place of real milk. You can drink it straight, or use it on your cereal like real milk. I recall a friend in college who was allergic to milk using orange juice on her cereal... that didn't work well at all. Apple juice works better on cereal, but the dining hall only had orange juice. I'm sure this person would have welcomed a non-milk alternative if it had been available at the time.

It's not so much that non-milk alternatives are on the market, because they do have their uses - it's that they're trying to pass it off as somehow equivalent to real milk.


That's why it's beyond understanding that they're still calling these tubes of 100% vegetable matter "sausages", and selling them to people who go out of their way to avoid things like... sausage. The very name sausage implies that there is meat in it. You can look at the package of vegetable meat tubes and you instantly recognize the tubes as being sausage shaped, so the mind says it looks like the meat called "sausage".

I can't imagine the mental disconnect involved in someone being utterly opposed to eating meat of any kind looking at this package that's labeled sausage and thinking "ooh, sausage, yum!"

Just like with the non-milk alternatives to milk, I don't really have a problem with them making sausage shaped tubes of vegetables. They still come under the heading of food, even if they are highly processed extractions of proteins with some chunks of vegetables and fruits in them. If eating vegetable tubes is your thing, fine. But calling it sausage is simply incongruous with everything being vegan is supposed to stand for. They need to come up with better names for these things - names that provide a more accurate description.

And finally - calling vegan tubes "sausage" also goes against USDA definition of sausage:

If they're using these fake-meat products to transition from an omnivore diet to a vegan diet, fine. But as you said the sheer amount of processing and travel involved in the fake meats and such, it's not helpful in any way.

If they really believe it's better for the animals, then own it and eat the real food that defines your vegan stance: vegetables, beans, fruits, and grains, not highly processed ready-made versions of those foods. Having a few go-to recipes for vegan burgers is one thing - maybe the combination of certain beans, veggies, and seasonings ground up into a mush that can be cooked on a grill has a great taste and texture. Eventually they need to own their diet choices in a less destructive way than buying ready made vegan products.

If there's anything I've learned over the years doing LC, you can't count on the commercially produced specialty products to be there forever. You can't even count on being able to find specialty ingredients for your favorite specialty treats forever.

The same thing will happen with the ultra-processed vegan foods - they're already changing the recipes for some of the vegan burgers.


This is part of it that I seriously doubt most of them even realize. They're so focused on "saving the animals" while eating foods that remind them of animal foods that they aren't really thinking about the fact that all those substitutes for animal products are far more environmentally detrimental than all the cow farts and burps in the world.

Our two non-preachy vegan friends said they used to eat vegan meat substitutes but one day they woke up and said, “Why are we eating something that tastes like what we are trying not to eat?”

Although personally, I think they are doing it all wrong, unlike most vegans, they don't get on their high horse. In fact, when we meet them at a restaurant, we go to places that have vegan for them, and omnivore for us. We just accept each other's preferences. No questions asked, and talk about things we have in common.



You are correct. If it wasn't for omnivores, there wouldn't be any of the animals we have domesticated. No cows, no pigs, or anything else. These animals are alive because we want them for food.

Sure, we eventually take their lives, but they would not have one if we didn't breed them. You don't see Holsteins in the wild.

I do have a problem with growing a chicken in a tiny cage, so I don't eat chicken.

For cows and pigs, they are protected from the kind of predators that traumatize them before death with tooth and claws(pumas, wolves) and kill them quickly.

No chasing them down and tearing into the neck like a puma, or biting their leg tendons as they run for their life until they collapse the way a wolf pack does.

So we are actually doing a service to the animals. Giving them lives, and lives without fear.

Vegans are not being kind to the environment, either. Contrary to what the covert advertising media tells us, the fertilizer industry emits 100 times more than all the cow farts and burps combined. If we took grassland, and converted it to veggies, we would need a lot of fertilizer, insecticide, and herbicides.

I have nothing against vegans as long as they don't try to force their 'religion' on others. They are nothing more than picky eaters, and I can relate, I'm a picky eater too. I don't eat sugar, and high glycemic starches. I won't try to convert the vegans, and as they don't try to convert me, everything is OK.

Exactly. I have a friend who is also very picky, and I do the gentlest of nudges, like telling him how good my Greek yogurt/whey protein with fruit is just as tasty as his sugary yogurt, but much better for him.

Gentle nudges are fine, but don't act like the vegans who try to convert people. If you do, then you can't complain if someone does it to you.

Quoting myself because I just realized - many vegans are very reliant on the fake-meat/fake cheese/fake egg products currently on the market.

We're already seeing that some of these companies are struggling - there's simply not enough vegans in this country to sustain the kind of sales they need to achieve in order to stay in business long term.

That means that many of the currently available products will very likely disappear from grocery shelves - probably within the next couple of years. Without those products available, many of those who have been relying on them to eat vegan when everything in their system screams that they really want meat/chicken/eggs, they're not going to have that option any more. They'll either go-all-in to stick to veganism, or make some kind of concessions, and return to eating at least some forms of animal products, even if it's just eggs and dairy.

That's if the nutrient deficiencies inherent in a strictly vegan diet doesn't get to them first.

I think I read somewhere that about 2% of the US population are vegan. I don't think that's enough to sustain a business. But they can be vegans eating the vegan side of an omnivorous diet.

Just as I eat on the ketogenic side of a much larger diet.

I remember when the first wave of low-carb came around, when we still called it Atkins. The low-carb diet waned as the covert ads pretending to be doctor written articles told us we needed carbs.

It got very difficult to find foods pitched as low-carb. We had no LC breads, ice creams, candies, and so forth. So we ate what we could out of the general diet.

We're fortunate enough now to be a big enough market for people to pitch products to. I can get keto bread in a grocery store made by Arnold. I can find low-carb pasta, brownies, chocolate made with stevia, and even low-carb ice cream if I look hard enough.

And I still read covert ads masquerading as scientific articles telling us how eating sugar will make us live longer, be healthier, fight dementia, and have a better sex life.

Just because the person signing the article says he/she is a doctor, nutritionist, scientist, or any other expert, doesn't mean he or she is, or that he or she actually wrote it.

I remember when “doctors” wrote articles telling us that science has proved that smoking cigarettes was healthy.

Now those same sham scientists are penning covert advertisements telling us to eat a plant based, low fat, high carb diet and to avoid meat protein because of the cow farts. In reality, the fertilize industry emits 100 times more methane than the livestock does. But they don't count that when making the comparison.

“There are three kinds of lies, lies, damn lies and statistics.” Mark Twain.

Look at old pictures from the 50s and 60s, before the low-fat, high-carb diet was promoted.

Obviously, they have been lying to us. Don't believe everything you read.