Hacker News Reader

It's quite hard but not impossible (pun intended). Full disclosure: Patrick Brown was on my committee in grad school. I've had many long conversations with him about these things and he's quite aware of all the challenges. The talk of scientifically breaking down the problem and figuring out exactly what makes meat meat is not just talk, it's actually the way he and the company operates. I think the heavy duty science they're putting into this is going to eventually yield a "burger" that is functionally indistinguishable in many applications.

I think there's always going to be a place for The Counter or other such premium burgers, but what about the zillions of patties used by the likes of Burger King, McDonald's, In-N-Out? Those are cooked heavily, and flavor engineered six ways to Sunday. The top of the SUV analogy is nice, but realistically most burgers are not terribly subtle flavor experiences coming from the brilliance of the meat substrate.

How many millions of gallons of water and tons of greenhouse gases would be eliminated if 10% of patties at big chains were vegetarian? Even small shifts in consumption could have incredibly positive impacts on the environment and perhaps even overall health.

> The top of the SUV analogy is nice, but realistically most burgers are not terribly subtle flavor experiences coming from the brilliance of the meat substrate.

Are we talking about fast food burgers? Then yes, flavor country lives in the lab, not the burger. But this article seemed to be strongly hinting at a meat substitute, not just a burger substitute for fast food chains (which I agree with you, would be wonderful). If the flavor experience isn't coming from the meat, than why is it so hard to find a widely excepted meat substitute?

That's why it seems strange the author loaded up their burger with exquisite toppings to taste the meat.

>Why are they (presumably) trying to recreate chuck? Ground chuck is a terrible thing to replicate. It's like burger meat designed by committee[1].

Probably because it's common as hell and if you could widely replace both burger patties and sausage filling with this meat substitute, you might be able to knock 5% off the worlds meat consumption with one product.

I wish they'd pick some other cut to grind up. I have to look really hard to find chuck steak. In my opinion it's the best taste/value combination - sure, a rib-eye tastes better, but you can buy five chuck steaks for one rib-eye, and chuck steak is usually cheaper, and tastier than trash like T-bones, top round, or London Broil.

I've broken down and bought the roasts and sliced them myself when I can't find proper chuck steaks.

> The bleeding heart (pun intended) in me cares about the sustainability of meat and the sheer cost of ethical farming. Fact of the matter is though, I won't give up eating meat. I love it, so so much.

This is exactly why plant-based substitutes for meat are so important. I'm a vegan, but I don't think the majority of human beings will ever be convinced to adopt a plant-based diet on ethical grounds. That's a completely hopeless cause. The only way is for plant-based versions of the foods meat eaters love to be 1) indistinguishable or better tasting 2) as cheap or cheaper. In the end, most people value convenience and their own experience over ethics and the experience of others (and I'm not saying I'm better than you or anyone else—I'm the same, just not on this particular issue), so I think the right approach is to make plant-based foods the most convenient and enjoyable experience. It may be far away, but it will happen eventually.

>are their lipids present spiking the flame, positively contributing to the cooking process?

They mention using coconut oil flecks to replace the beef's fat, so I imagine that'd contribute to the cooking process, "frying" it up a bit.

I think they try to do something similar to what the cow does when growing muscles (chaining proteins or whatever). So I think it browns the same.

Why chuck? Once this gets cheaper in production than meat burger, but still tastes exactly the same, the big fast-food chains might join the boat. So I guess they try to stay close to that.

I know why chuck, I was just being snarky. :)

I'm not going to sit here and pretend to know what, the good people of Impossible Foods, are doing. Way over my head. What I do know is recreating nature is hard work, with limited success.

ah sorry :) alright. As a non native vegetarian I don't even really know what "chuck" is, haha...

Ho! A learning opportunity. I know you're a vegetarian, but maybe this might interest you...or someone.

The chuck sub-primal cut is the shoulder of the cow. As you can imagine, the shoulder gets a lot of use while the cow is alive, so there is a lot of connective tissue which makes the cut tough (fwiw the muscles that are rarely used are the most tender to eat) However, a cow being a cow and not a horse, there is a good amount of fat interspersed within the cut. So while the cut is hard to eat like a typical steak, it has a wonderful meat to fat ratio which gives it good flavor if cooked properly (think stews and roasts). That ideal fat to meat ratio, combine with the grind making it more palatable, the ease of (mass) producing, and low price point for the cut, make it the cut of choice by distributors.

A properly cooked seven bone chuck steak is a taste to behold, though. Far and away my favorite cut, with all of the marbling, on the grill. Obviously, not for you if you like your steak more than medium rare, though, since cooking it all the way through tends to make it tougher than hell.

I haven't had the opportunity to have a seven bone chuck steak. I'll have to give it a try. Thanks!