Is this shit good for cutting out meat but still getting enough protein?

Can you survive off grass or wheat?

yeah, I've been looking it up, pretty much nothing bad(unless you have trouble with the tase of course). I also recommend pieces.

Is Quornposting the new mêmê?

most of the time we feed the animals with stuff people can't eat, so there is little loss if we eat the corn and the animals get the straw. also the entire animals gets used from skin to bones so there more to whole thing. so a mix of both is the best solution we have so far.

it's fine that you don't want to cut out meat. But this seems to be a serious question. Which worries me a little.

Yes, a lot of people in poor countries eat almost no meat and they survive. Meat is very much a luxury product. (As is Quorn of course (and being Veeky Forums, could also be considered a luxury product))

The chicken tastes nice at least. Might try more for the sake of.

>just watch out with increasing your fibre intake quickly or expect some serious farting
I eat high fibre bran already

cool... but you'd be adding more on top of that wouldn't you?

The farts tend to settle down after two-three weeks, in my experience, anyways but I get them pretty bad.

>most of the time we feed the animals with stuff people can't eat

That's not true.

>also the entire animals gets used from skin to bones so there more to whole thing

Yeah but you forgot that animals are fucking bred for the purpose of us eating them.

You need fucking 15.000 liters of water to get 1 kg of beef. Source:
theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/10/how-much-water-food-production-waste

How can you even promote eating meat, jfc. I understand that you want to eat it but don't make up any bullshit stories

Mo Farah became the celebrity face of Quorn meat in the UK a few years ago, a few weeks later he fainted and collapsed during a race; the only time. You do the maths....

The chicken patties are about the best chicken meat substitute I've had.

Keep in mind a percent (I think about 10%) of people don't react well to myco protein (protein from mushrooms/fungus

>Keep in mind a percent (I think about 10%) of people don't react well to myco protein
Nah that was just bullshit from lobbyists when Quorn launched in the US. It's like 1 in 50,000 or something, way less than the people allergic to shit like soy

First off the water thing on there is a claim,
Not actually a fact. At all.

> eating meat to survive
> that's nature

Yes because conveniently packaged carcass in a neat plastic container is incredibly survival orientated and just as our ancestors ate to survive.

The fact is we don't need meat to survive anymore. Plants are healthier and abundant.

god damn hippy

I'm eating it on a cut.

I was eating veggie meals for lunch without any solid protein substitute, so I thought quorn would be a good idea. The flavour is a bit weird, and knowing it comes from mushrooms puts me off a little, so I only eat it occasionally.

So you can survive off grass and wheat?

Hello amerilard, there are these things called vegetables, nuts, beans, pulses and so on.

I don't do that. I buy frozen meat and cook it myself. You don't need meat because you're a limp-wristed weakling.

>healthier
nice meme

That's not grass or wheat. Please read up the reply chain.

>knowing it comes from mushrooms puts me off a little
It doesn't actually, it's a single celled fungus as genetically close to a mushroom as humans are to a jellyfish. Yeast is more similar.

>That's not true.

food.gov.uk/business-industry/farmingfood/animalfeed/what-farm-animals-eat
read for yourself tard, its not bullshit you just fell for some alternative facts vegan fairytale

so what happens to the 15000L they can't disappear right ? ever heard of the water cycle. Ofc any kind of farming should be done in the appropriate climate regions. wheat uses and other crops use water too you know often thousands of L.

>You don't need meat because you're a limp-wristed weakling.
Not him but hence why you eat shit like OPs image for the protein, to not be some vegan weakling meme

>The current world population wouldn't be sustainable without meat.
Are you insane? I mean I'm not even a veganfag or anything but Jesus H Christ do you not know what trophic levels are? Basically, every pound of animal you eat requires about 10 pounds (on average) of plant matter to grow - so clearly eating the plants directly would give more overall calories. Well, not plants necessarily, technically just eating lower on the food chain has the same effect, but usually this means either eating plants or stuff like insects and krill.

I would go easy on the grass as the human stumage can't handle it, but unprocessed wheat on it's own is not optimal but better then McDonalds.

Can you survive off what those animals eat? Straw, wheat, grass? Bugs?

You will die on a wheat only diet.

My meal has vegan quorn pieces mixed in with beans tastes pretty good desu

>Can you survive off what those animals eat? Straw, wheat, grass? Bugs?
I don't get your point, humans can grow plants other than straw

Also is this shit good or just the latest fad meme?

I'm not sure what this discussion is about. But Wheat is about the best thing if you're forced to live on it alone. It's the staple food for survival.

Not really. Ideally, we'd grow stuff for human consumption on all arrable land suited for it, and grow stuff like grass, clover and other animal feeds on land that was not suitable (those things require less nutrients and can grow in poorer soil). This is not the case in reality; we both use land that could grow human food to grow animal feed, and use stuff like soybeans (which human can eat) to feed animals.

The most common animal feeds are corn, soybeans, oats, barley, rice and wheat (and to some degree peanuts). And yes, you could survive on it technically since it would provide you with both carbs and complete proteins. Especially if it was supplemented with smaller amounts of meat and dairy, from suitanable, organic farming that only utilized land that cannot grow crops for human consumption.

Because that's what animals we consume eat idiot. You can't use a flawed argument that we could survive off the plant matter they eat when we can't. Growing things like corn is different than growing wheat or grass.

>humans can live without protein
You know why kids in africa die from their wheat only diets?

>complete proteins
>wheat
pick one

>Because that's what animals we consume eat idiot. You can't use a flawed argument that we could survive off the plant matter they eat when we can't.
But I never fucking said that? Did you fail middle school or something? Without needing to rear millions of cattle we would just grow different crops. And we often feed animals stuff like soy anyway, which we can eat. It's not even mutually exclusive.

Do you know what cattle eat? Grass. So now we're going to use that land to grow crops for ourselves instead of just letting them eat the grass that grows naturally?

You're missing the point, which is that one could in many instances grow stuff other than straw and grass on that land, but opts to grow stuff for animal consumption because meat. It's an alternative cost: an area of land that could have produced 10X calories if stuff for direct human consumption was grown there, instead produces X calories of meat.

In the cases where the land used cannot grow anything but grass, there's no alternative cost. The problem is that we don't limit grass cultivation in that way.

What about oats, rice, soy, and all the fucking vegetables there are? You don't eat just one crop. Not to mention shit like mycoprotein which the power of the human mind (something you appear to severely lack) allows us to grow in vats.

Good and tasty. Not magic, though, just good food.

>Cattle eat grass mostly
WRONG. The cattle grown for meat are fed tonnes of extra shit, not just grass from their fields. Are you 10 or something and think things are like old MacDonald's happy nursury rhyme farm? It's an industrial process today.

they die because they don't eat anything. Again, I have no idea what this discussion is about. Of course eating only Wheat is sub-optimal.

>mycoprotein
Fake food?

It's been on sale for 3 decades now?

I eat grass fed meat.

Wheat is an incomplete protein.

umass.edu/nibble/infofile/incprot.html

>I eat grass fed meat.
Hello mr millionaire, most of the world does not.

It's fake food.

It's barely a few dollars more for a pound. That's your fault. You know what costs more? Vegan diets.

Explain.

I
Don't
Intend
to
eat
only
wheat
what
is
your
point
???

I'm not even vegan lmao, I eat meat probably once or twice a week.
And at least in the UK quorn stuff is the same price as any non-shitty meat.

You didn't even read the post. I specifically mentioned beans, corn and rice.

Oh my god are you trolling or this uneducated? Have you read a single post on this topic ITT?? Yes, cows IDEALLY eat grass and grass IDEALLY just grows naturally and by letting cows eat the grass and then eat the cows we gain bonus calories we would not otherwise get. IDEALLY. But this is NOT what actually happens: firstly, animals are fed stuff like beans and rice and corn that COULD feed humans and secondly, grass is CULTIVATED in areas that could support other crops more suitable for humans. If stuff worked the way you think it works there'd be no problem, but it doesn't actually work that way. Jesus.

its the latest meme fad, look into german, netherland or denmark traditional food they have used it for a long time. it's still a good vegetable and better than some other salads but nothing crazy superfood stuff. it's good on paper for vitamin a, k & c and some others but since it's around 85% water you need to eat a fuck load of it. But it's in the top five salats for sure.

My point was your stupid image was wrong.

It is created in a lab.

>I specifically mentioned beans, corn and rice.
Also incomplete.

It contains 9 grams of incomplete protein

The opposite is the case

theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet

>It is created in a lab.
Almost all food is processed industrially today though. Mycoprotein is basically brewed similar to how beer is with yeast. It's just we harvest the fungus and not the liquid they ferment this time.

>You know what costs more? Vegan diets.
Yeah I mean I know a few vegans and if you insist on being a faggot about it (the ones I know sure do) and buy fake-meat crap from specialty stores and farm fresh produce from Whole Foods then yup it's gonna cost you. But that's cause people are faggots: stuff like lentils, beans, rice, etc. which SHOULD be the bulk of a less faggy vegan diet is cheap as fuck.

Also, you still miss the point: sure the cattle you eat ate grass, and sure people could not have eaten said grass. But could the land used to grow the grass have been used for something humans could eat directly? If so, there's a huge alternative cost involved in terms of calories.

>UN
>climate change!!
Dropped.

>hurr durr let's survive off food created in a lab instead of eating real food
What?

So Vegans want to terraform natural grasslands into large crop fields? Do you not care about environment and the food chain at all?

>>hurr durr let's survive off food created in a lab instead of eating real food
Says the person eating lab bred strains of every plant in modern big business agriculture, covered in lab developed pesticides and maybe even with some lab developed GM.

>Beans and rice are an incomplete protein.
>Beans and corn are an incomplete protein.
>Soybeans are an incomplete protein.
Boy, you're super wrong. Really hope you're shitposting and not seriously walking about the world being this retarded.

Yeah but calling it unnatural and fake is a convenient excuse not to try it *sips Monster Ultra*.

Sure bud

Look it up they are incomplete. Soy might not be but it high in estrogen.

>Look it up they are incomplete

What essential amino acid do any of those things not contain?

Well firstly it's not a vegan argument and I'm not vegan, it's from conservation biologists actually.
But no, NATURAL grasslands are a fine source of bonus calories humans would otherwise not get, since they are not suitable for growing crops. The goal is to limit grass cultivation to such natural grasslands, and NOT use land that is suitable for growing crops for it, because this would waste calories.

>Being a climate science denier is edgy and cool on Veeky Forums now
How old are you, guy?

the point he's making is you combine beans + rice, beans + corn and you get all the necessary amino acids

Don't both, he seems to be a mong who thinks farms are like kiddy nursery rhymes

>What essential amino acid do any of those things not contain?
You have the internet at your finger tips.

As opposed to the effect of sustaining multiple farm animals whereby companies are flattening forests just to be able to sustain the demand of meat driven by big business. Do you not see this is a worse off condition given that there is a larger population who can afford meat now and they are pushing limits of sustainability to create meat on demand. Its unfeasible to carry on this way not to mention the carbon footprint alongside the growth of livestock and outputs of said animals into the atmosphere in constrast growing vegetables, wheats etc. is less of a strain on industry and the planet it makes sense to atleast cut down on the amount of meat consumed which would reduce demand.

And I'm not seeing any mission amino acids. What missing EAAs do you see in these foods?

Do you have any sources to back up what you say?

As far as carbon footprint goes, that's a fallacious argument because animals have existed here for millions of years. The real harm is from cars and factories not animal farts.

Then you lack the ability to use the internet. Sorry for your learning disability.

>egg whites
>not vegan
Nigga, it's a period from a chicken. If I had my own chickens and ate the eggs they made for me would it make me a monster?

>Look it up they are incomplete
Yeah, on their own. Which is why you combine them. Ever notice how some combo of legume+rice/corn is a staple diet to people around the world?

>Soy might not be but it high in estrogen.
If that's true, then bioaccumulation would mean that meat would be even higher in it. Since you don't know what bioaccumulation is because you're an idiot, let me summarize: if every lb of soybeans has X amount of estrogen, and a cow needs to eat 10 lbs of soy to make 1 lb of cow, then every lb of cow would contain as much estrogen as 10 lbs of soy.

But no one is saying we should eat the soy instead of the animals eating it. We COULD, but could also use the land it's grown on to grow something else (some other legume, perhaps) that isn't tainted with estrogen.

>animals have existed here for millions of years.
Not in these numbers.

>brb eating 5 pounds of rice and beans to get my protein

>Not in these numbers.
>animal farts are going to ruin the climate
wow

>say something with no evidence
>get asked for evidence
>"wow ur dumb"

>it sounds absurd to me so it's wrong

umass.edu/nibble/infofile/incprot.html

>Plant foods are considered incomplete proteins because they are low or lacking in one or more of the amino acids we need to build cells.

>muh incomplete meme
the body can make proteins you just eat the ones you can't synthesize.. wow so hard

also while we are here
>muh b12
most livestock would be getting this from eating the dirty soil in which the b12 cultures are present but since they generally don't because factory farming is all about as low of a cieling for profit being heavily subsizied. They don't eat grass rather, leftover trash from manufacturing that has no b12 in it. b12 doesn't just magically appear in herbivores. All sources have to be consuming it in some fashion.

It would surely make you a retard if you called yourself vegan.

>The real harm is from cars and factories not animal farts

Please reread my post and acknowledge that i have stated that the process to groew livestock is an issue. This alone is a major factor for why this is not sustainable in the future alongside there now being animals grown at a much larger and faster rate than ever before.

Regarding your comment about animals have lived here for millions of years. I do hope youre joking, recorded history states that humans did not have over 6 billion inhabitants at one time before now. Therefore leading onto the point that now with this large population and the majority wanting meat the animals are now having to be grown en masse to support this demand. Please apply some logic to your supposed 'rebuttal' and stop grasping at straws its embarassing.

Corn
nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5687/2
>contains all essential amino acids

Beans
nutritiondata.self.com/facts/legumes-and-legume-products/4284/2
>contains all essential amino acids

Rice
nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5707/2
>contains all essential amino acids

"Incomplete protein" is a widespread myth that's debunked by a simple google search of the amino acid composition of any plant protein.

Not enough for bodybuilders, maybe, but more than enough for ordinary people which is what is being discussed here. Especially when supplemented with some sustainably produced meat and dairy (in lower quantities that we eat today).

We'll it's not farts, actually, it's 'burps' mostly. And from ruminants, mostly, so less comes from chickens and pigs. But yes, methane from animal husbandry accounts for about 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.

Until. You. Fucking. COMBINE. Them. You. Goddamn. IMBECILL.

Essential amino acids are ones we cannot synthesize. That's why they are essential. Incomplete proteins don't have all the essential amino acids we need to survive.

Your problem is with the method to grow animals not the fact that we eat animals instead. This is a fallacious argument and could apply to vegan diets too. If vegan diets fed the earth they would be mass-produced with high carbon footprints as well.

>Your problem is with the method to grow animals not the fact that we eat animals instead. This is a fallacious argument and could apply to vegan diets too. If vegan diets fed the earth they would be mass-produced with high carbon footprints as well.
It's a literal fucking fact that vegan diets have a lower carbon footprint though? Simply because 1kg of beef needs many kg of plant matter to b made. You're retarded

None of your links state what you are claiming. But nice try.

>18 percent
Wow.

Try reading them then.

>Incomplete proteins don't have all the essential amino acids we need to survive.
Why is the idea of eating TWO different plants, say rice+beans, which TOGETHER have all the essential amino acids, so fucking hard for you to grasp.

>could apply to vegan diets too
I've been arguing for eating more stuff from lower trophic levels, not world-wide veganism. Due to how trophic levels work, eating lower will ALWAYS be more energy efficient and have a lower carbon footprint. It's just more efficient per definition, it's not up to argument.

Do you disbelieve that fact?

>It's a literal fucking fact that vegan diets have a lower carbon footprint though
Because not many people eat vegan diets. It's like saying Sweden has less deaths than North America. Obviously, it does. That does not mean Sweden's healthcare is superior. If vegan diets fed as many people as meat does then the carbon footprint would go up drastically. Veganism would not be magically immune from corporate greed.