Have been almost completly vegetarian for the last 4 and a half years and was pretty much a carnivore before that, so I feel this is as unbiased of an opinion as is possible.
The Beyond, Gardien, Impossible, etc fake chicken have more flavor, nearly indistinguishable texture, are just as juicy, and aren’t greasy. At this point, I consider them better than regular chicken with the sole exception of fried chicken which was never my favorite but I can see the appeal of it.
I’ll concede that the beef substitutes have a ways to go (I like them and they’re not bad but they’re not fooling anyone, either) but they’re not the subject of this opinion.
firstly, culture, specifically cooking culture is very much based around 4 main protein types, beef chicken lamb and pork. when cooking you want something easy and obvious to substitute, so you pick the thing labeled the thing you want.
also, most people don’t stop eating meat because it tastes bad, they stop eating it because it’s inherently cruel and a huge burden on the world’s fragile ecosystem. of course i still want a juicy steak, but morality gets in the way and i compromise.
Isn’t cooking with the meat substitutes different enough that you need to compensate for it? I’m not a very good cook, so my assumption might be wrong there. But if I’m making reb bean burgers instead of beef burgers I imagine it’s more useful to know “this is mostly bean with some binder” than “beef substitute”
And if flavor is the main goal then I think the industry in general is doing a bad job. Most of the time the base for the substitute has such a different flavor that they throw a bunch of other stuff on top of it to mask it instead of embracing the flavor of the substitute.
I’m not trying to say you’re wrong, but it still doesn’t make much sense to me. Why remind people of the moral conundrum in the label.
great comment, lots of fun. i wanna start at the bottom;
for someone in that “scene”, reminders are constant and unrelenting, meat is a basis of western society. bringing it up isnt declaring an unspoken truth, it’s just declaring a somewhat recognisable flavour profile.
well, yeah, maybe. idk ive never made a better one, its probably really fucking hard to make products that taste specifically like beef, especially to a palate that eats it regularly.
i definately see what your saying, but meat is like, the easiest thing to cook, (especially within the context that meat subs would be eaten in). burger is an especially bad example as you really just want to sear it.
dunno if any of these answers are satisfying, let me know :)
I think your answers would be more satisfying if the flavor and textures were closer on substitutes. I’m sure it is hard to do, I think I always assumed if companies spent more time making tasty meat alternatives, instead of trying to replicate meat we’d make more progress in reducing meat consumption. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking though.
I look at it as a person who eats meat but is interested in trying alternatives pretty casually. I’m not looking for something to replace meats in my life, I’m looking for new foods to fill the same role in a meal as meats (sometimes). And I just find it a bit annoying to have to go to the fine print / ingredient list so often to see what I’m actually buying.
I appreciate the chat though, I can see where you’re coming from. I think I treat food a bit differently from someone just looking to grab their components of a meal… and calling in “meat substitute” is mostly a tell that it’s high in protein and fills that roll in a meal. Removes the extra step of needing to know what parts of the alternatives have the protein…
If I cared enough I’d have some from-scratch recipes, but it’s more of a minor annoyance and something to think about while I shop
for the record, i dont really buy these things, not very tasty and quite expensive lol