Hacker News Reader

>Is it eliminating animal suffering, reducing global warming as farming is a major polluter, or are they actually just disgusted by animal products in general?

For me, it's both. For others, it's religious. For far fewer, it's health (allergies, intolerances, etc). In all of those cases, if a restaurant advertises their product as meat free, it should be or else it's false advertising.

Further complicating the issue is that burger king has for years sold a veggie patty that is heated in the microwave - using separate tools and is "contamination free".

So anyways, if they want to advertise meat-free, then it should be a meat-free product that is served to you.

Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products. I have a number of vege friends and for some of them, I make sure, when barbecuing to use a separate grill and tongs. Others don't really care.

> Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products.

I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place.

I mean, every surface in one of those places is eventually coated with a layer of grease, right?

Thats kinda the point I think.

They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it.

But what percent? I mean if a fly lands in it? Human sweat? What about insect parts in grain.

>> They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it.

Then there's really no such thing as "vegan". All fruits, vegetables, grains, flours...have a certain number of insects in or on them (especially if they're organic).

It would be possible to have some definition like the one for Kosher rules (fundamentally, less than 1 part in 60 doesn't count, though there are many nuances on top of that), but 100% absence of animal products is simply not possible.

> I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place.

You may well fid it hard to be believe, but vegans actually have meat eating friends and may be accepting of other people's dietary choices, and may want to socialise with them - without putting meat products in their mouths.

The case was raised by an individual plaintiff, but in general vegans have a variety of different reasons not to want to encourage farming of animals.

Some of those include discomfort with eating animals and their byproducts, as you mention -- for others, it's based on a desire to encourage more sustainable environmentally-friendly food options.

For some subset of the spectrum mentioned, cross-contamination is an important issue - and for the rest, it may be acceptable under some circumstances, but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice.

> but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice.

There may be a downside, if the cost of compliance is too high and the business decides to stop offering the product.

I think I understand what you're saying, but could you elaborate on it to make clear who suffers the downside and why?

I visited a strictly vegan Indian restaurant once, there was a huge kerfuffle that night because some diners had brought a baby in and was spoon feeding the child baby food from a jar that was not vegan. This wasn't the issue... the issue was that the spoon was the restaurants spoon. Their religious convictions deemed that spoon now "violated". They threw the family out and made them pay for the cutlery as well.

If they'd used their own cutlery there would not have anywhere near as much animosity.

I see this sort of behavior as irrational. But I dont live these peoples lives and dont believe what they believe.

I just liked their food :-P

Why in the world did the family pay for the spoon? I mean I might have offered if someone had politely informed me about what I'd done. But I'm certainly not going to of it's a demand.

their religious convictions stated that they could no longer use the cutlery. they had to dispose of it.

ie, could never be cleaned enough to be "vegan" again...

bloody bonkers really.

Edit, yes it was metal...

I wonder if they were Jain vegetarians. The strictest Jains don't even eat root vegetables like onions or potatoes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jain_vegetarianism

Or maybe "level 5 vegans", they won't eat anything that casts a shadow.

Aren't those called "breatarians"? People living on air and sunlight.

There are also people who refrain from eating beef for religious reasons.

Food is an area where most people have strong personal preferences. It may not be entirely consistent or logical. It is based on taste, both physical and emotional. Why should we expect vegans to be any different?

Why single out and question veganism specifically?

Wouldn't vegetarians, religious folks, and alpha-gal syndrome sufferers also want a zero animal-product burger? The market is pretty diverse for this demand.

Because the article was specifically about a vegan?

For religious people, there is really no sense to be made out of it. I say this as a Muslim.

I did address alpha-gal by saying that those who have allergies should be mindful of cross contamination in restaurants that serve the stuff they are allergic to.