Odd Connections

‘Go on, EU, ban the ‘veggie burger’ – it will be a blessing for vegans’

Tony Naylor writing for the Guardian had this interesting note when we’re talking about how we label our food:

Steak is not a cut of meat. Not an animal. Not a synonym for beef. It derives from the Old Norse, steikja, meaning to roast on a spit. It is happenstance that steijk came to be associated with Vikings roasting beef (new Nordic cookery is all about roasting celeriac, instead), and, being pedantic, unless a restaurant spit-roasts its ribeyes, you could equally accuse it of misselling.

Similarly, not only have hamburgers never contained ham (the word is 19th-century US slang for a Hamburg-style minced beef steak), but, in trying to fence off “burger” for beef now, Europe is 50 years too late. In Britain, 1970s vegetarianism and, later, Linda McCartney’s ready-meals, popularised the concept that burgers and sausages could be made without beef or pork. Eating a falafel or beetroot burger is no stranger than eating one made out of chicken. No one in Europe is making a fuss about that.

‘How much is a whale worth?’

Protecting large, charismatic animals like whales is often seen as a sort of charity work individuals and governments do on behalf of nature. A team of economists led by Ralph Chami, an assistant director of the IMF’s Institute for Capacity Development, wanted to change the way we think about whales by quantifying the benefit they provide us in dollars and cents. 

This sort of thinking offers a new opportunity to reconsider the value of an animal. As the world has larger discussions about climate change, animals around the world can help or harm our planet depending on what we do or don’t do with them.

The analysis hasn’t yet been published in a peer-reviewed scientific paper, and there are still important scientific knowledge gaps in terms of how much carbon whales can capture. But based on the research that’s been done so far, it’s clear to the economists that if we protect great whales, it will reap major dividends for the planet.

Chami hopes this finding will “start a conversation with the policymakers who don’t buy into saving animals for the sake of animals.”

At this point, any angle that introduces people to veganism is good. And even saving one animal could have a large net effect, like when wolves were brought back into Yellowstone.

Great whales, including the filter feeding baleen and sperm whales, help sequester carbon in a few ways. They hoard it in their fat and protein-rich bodies, stockpiling tons of carbon apiece like giant, swimming trees. When a whale dies and its carcass descends to the bottom of the sea, that stored carbon is taken out of the atmospheric cycle for hundreds to thousands of years, a literal carbon sink.

A study published in 2010 estimated that eight types of baleen whales, including blue, humpback, and minke whales, collectively shuttle nearly 30,000 tons of carbon into the deep sea each year as their carcasses sink. If great whale populations rebounded to their pre-commercial whaling size, the authors estimate this carbon sink would increase by 160,000 tons a year.

[…]

Using the current market price of carbon dioxide, the economists then worked out the total monetary value of this marine mammalian carbon capture, and added it to other economic benefits great whales provide through things like ecotourism.

Altogether, Chami and his colleagues estimated that each of these gentle giants is worth about $2 million over its lifetime. The entire global population of great whales? Possibly a one trillion dollar asset to humanity.

Interesting.

“We don’t want to oversell the concept,” said Steven Lutz, the Blue Carbon Program Leader at GRID-Arendal, a Norweigan foundation that works with the United Nations Environment Program. “It’s not like we save the whales and we save the climate.”

That’s true, but any step in the right direction is a good step.

‘Veggie Mijas and the vegan diet revolution’

Victoria Leandra has a great new piece up about Amy Quichiz’s queer and POC-group Veggie Mijas. It touches on many parts of veganism that need to be talked about more:

People of color also experience underrepresentation in the vegan mainstream, Quichiz tells Mic. She used to be the only person of color at vegan events she attended while in college and having white vegan friends who often policed her for her decisions. Many would shame her for not being “a real vegan” if she ate a free meal on campus and took the meat off the plate — their shade is, she now knows, an egregious example of privileged snobbery.That food-shaming, at one time, made Quichiz feel that a vegan lifestyle was out of her reach.

What Quichiz speaks about in this article is important to all communities, and especially ones of color.

Black and Brown communities are often food deserts, areas with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, and understanding the circumstances under why someone can’t be vegan 24/7 is important to the Veggie Mijas’ mission. They serve as a resource for recipes with items you may already have in your pantry or might be part of your diet already like avocado, rice, beans, or plantains. This ethos also translates to its events, where vegan or not, all POC are welcomed if they have a willingness to learn.

Learning how to cook in this environment sounds incredible. Food is society’s glue, and Veggie Mijas seems like it’s building something important and new.

Eating habits start from an early age, so Quichiz’s vision is to instill a strong sense of food values in children elementary-aged to teenagers by empowering them to eat healthier. There’s a direct line to the entire community, who Quichiz and her cohort can influence and support.

This is the thing that I hope grows, across this community and others. Cooking is difficult if you’ve never done it. I know when I first was learning to cook, the prospect of cooking an onion was a scary prospect. Cutting? Dicing? A big hot pan? I’d never done it, and I had no idea what to do. Just having one person around to help makes cooking a survivable and often fun endeavor.

I ordered their cook book. It helps support their work, and I bet it’ll be delicious if you’re looking to expand your cooking with simple staples like rice and beans.

‘Shalt thou eat an Impossible Burger? Religious doctrine scrambles to catch up to new food technology.’

Laura Reiley with an incredibly interesting piece for the Washington Post:

This month, Tyson announced it is investing in a company that will launch plant-based shrimp early next year, raising a curious question. Will it be kosher? The short answer is its ingredients — which mimic the verboten crustacean with a proprietary algae blend — could well be both kosher and halal. Once the product launches, the company will seek certification so that Jews who keep kosher and Muslims — certain Muslim groups avoid shellfish — can enjoy a shrimp cocktail, scampi, a po’ boy or ceviche.

And yet. In this era of plenitude and choice and disruptive technology, what is permissible, what is forbidden and what is flouting the letter of religious law? The food system is in flux, the rise of plant-based meats and the promise of cell-cultured meats bending categories such that legislation, ideology and theology are scrambling to keep up.

If God says no pork, how does He feel about a very persuasive forgery? And if only beef from the forequarter is permitted, how will observant Jews parse meat grown in a lab, no bones and no quarters at all? How do you bleed an animal with no blood or slaughter an animal humanely if there’s no slaughter? And if you give up meat for Lent, what constitutes a cheat?

This bit from Rabbi Eli Lando, the chief customer relations officer with OK Kosher, is an interesting question:

“Is it a violation of the spirit of the law? That becomes a realm that you can never end.”

[…]

The prohibitions, he said, are about the actual creatures (pigs, shellfish, rabbits and reptiles), not a plant-based facsimile, however uncanny the likeness. Strictly kosher Jews, he notes, are frequently big fans of fake crab made of finely pulverized white fish. Lando sees plant-based meat as a revolution of sorts.

“A person today knows that being kosher does not mean you have to go to the back of the store and look for something like a second-class citizen. Having those products commonly available is achieving a great milestone,” he said.

And I didn’t know this was part of the Muslim tradition of Halal:

The inspection and certification process is similar for halal foods. For plant-based products designed to imitate haram products (pork and other foods forbidden by Islamic law), Roger Othman, director of consumer relations for Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of America, said words matter.

“Plant-based bacon bits, for example. The product would qualify to be halal but may be repugnant to halal consumers if the word bacon appeared in the name,” Othman said. “Halal consumers would not know what pork chews like, maybe not even what it smells or looks like. If plant-based, it could qualify to be halal, but the naming should not contain any pork-related words.”

Which ties slightly back into to the recent legal flare-up between many states’ meat-industries and free-speech advocates that would allow plant-based foods to call themselves “meat”, “sausage”, or even a “burger”. It would be interesting to see if certain products might be repackaged or relabeled depending on what stores they end up in — so that they might be allowed into Halal shops or supermarkets in certain states that deem meat-related labeling illegal.

It’d be interesting if many vegan products, once fully mainstream and with widespread use, moved to welcome religious or more niche audiences by changing parts of their products to appeal to those needs. Maybe we’ll see the same product packaged twice: one named to reference a similar flavor or product (i.e. Tofurkey or things labeled “Chik’n”), and then another where the words give the impression of an entirely new category of product (e.g. seitan, tofu, tempeh). Or if Impossible developed another heme product that they didn’t test on rats to try to entice a certain group of strict vegans. All of these things are possible, but I don’t know what it would take to be cost-effective.

‘FOUR COUNTRIES UNITE TO FORM VEGAN WORLD ALLIANCE’

First the Vegan-Carne Alliance, and now the Vegan World Alliance. I think Alliances are the new thing.

The Dutch Association for Veganism, Vegan Australia, Vegan Society of Aotearoa New Zealand, and Vegan Society of Canada came together to address worldwide challenges and share initiatives to fulfill their individual and collective missions.

I’m assuming partnerships like this have happened before, but I especially am interested in this bit:

Its first project is to create a uniform certification system for vegan food products.

This problem is not unique. It’s tricky labeling thing and giving certification. You can see this the confusion mostly clearly in how they label eggs — and most people not knowing the difference between cage-free and pasture-raised. I think most people assume the former means the latter.

Maybe a better analog would be Jewish certifications of Kosher. Veganism is often akin to religious thinking with stringent devotion and oftentimes fairly vocal folks involved—so I think there is definitely some cross-over. And often the generalities of what people consider “vegan” varies person-to-person. Veganism will likely need some variants to properly help someone buying keep to their ethical system. There will likely be wedge issues, like gelatin from non-kosher animals for Jews. Here’s a small bit from a write-up on My Jewish Learning about Kosher Symbols:

“While there have been some lenient opinions over the centuries regarding gelatin,” Rabbi Lopatin said, “current Orthodox practice, at least in the Diaspora, is to not accept gelatin from non-kosher animals. Therefore, supervisions which do accept the leniencies of gelatin from non-kosher animals are not acceptable to (Orthodox) community standards.” And once you have an organization that allows for gelatin from a non-kosher animal, the community might be nervous accepting that organization’s supervision on any food, even if it doesn’t contain gelatin.

‘When Vegan Influencers Quit Being Vegan, the Backlash Can Be Brutal’

From Cassidy Dawn Graves at Vice:

Last March, vegan YouTuber Yovana Mendoza posted a video on her channel, Rawvana, that rocked her followers to their cores.

“I definitely did not feel ready to talk about this,” Mendoza told the camera, her expression solemn.

She had garnered nearly two million subscribers for her raw vegan diet content, but had recently been spotted with a plate of fish and called out for her ostensible hypocrisy. In the video, which has since been made private, she explained that while six years of raw veganism “elevated [her] consciousness,” recently, her health had begun to suffer. She lost her period, she was “basically anemic,” and she was riddled with digestive issues. Eventually, she said, she couldn’t take it anymore, and started eating fish and eggs

The biggest problem with quote-unquote influencers of any kind is approaches and understanding can vary. They often are not experts but attract viewers who think they display an expertise. And what happens to their health is a display of that ignorance.

Eating an unhealthy diet of any kind will have adverse side effects. Not just a vegan one, and balancing a diet isn’t easy. Just look at the incredible amount of people in America with heart disease, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and on and on. Health problems happen to carnivores and herbivores alike.

What’s frustrating for me is that instead of continuing to be vegan in a more common capacity, they rescind their whole ethos because their extreme form of veganism left them with health issues.

At least, the article gets it right:

Of course, many vegans are perfectly healthy. “Most healthy people should be able to adapt to an all-plant diet,” says Marion Nestle, nutritionist, professor, and James Beard Award-winning author. She emphasizes eating a “variety of plant food sources, taking in enough calories to maintain a healthy weight, and finding a good source of vitamin B12.”

[…]

Nestle notes these problems are more associated with “starvation” than a standard plant-based diet, which “should not cause people to lose weight or have any of those issues.”

The revolt and anger in their comment section speak to the worst part of veganism, in my opinion. Yelling will never change someone’s mind. Unfollow and move along. There’s likely someone better out there anyway.

People need to come to a more plant-focused lifestyle in their own way. Whether it’s for the environment, the animals, or for our health — no one is going to switch teams because they were given an ALL-CAPS rant in their comment section or bluntly told-off in person. And though I do think having vigilant convictions is great for the self, we can’t wrap others in the blanket of our beliefs.

‘The Most Dangerous Animal On Earth’

A perfect little photo.

And I loved this comment from Reddit user Ibar-Twigs in the comment section:

When I was a kid I used to love going to this woodland nearby (urban UK so this was a big deal). There was a wildlife trust clubhouse/cafe with a bunch of British wildlife exhibits telling you about local birds and such. The last exhibit was a sort of fairy door with a sign on it saying “Open if you dare and see the world’s most dangerous animal” or something along those lines. Open up the door and behold… A mirror. That really stuck with me and my young, impressionable mind.

Urban Nudges

Via Kottke:

A nudge is:

“any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives”

Essentially, making slightly difficult things easier.

I think vegan food is the same way, and why it’s been so exciting to go to restaurants that offer delicious options. It’s all about ease of access.

You can see it’s effect here with bike lanes in Washington, DC:

The researchers interviewed 2,283 cyclists using the bike lanes and found out that nearly ten percent of the users would have taken another mode of transportation if the bike lane hadn’t existed and around one percent of the interviewed said they would not have taken the trip at all. (NATCO)

This is why we must elect officials to government that give programs like these an opportunity. They could change how we live our lives, whether traveling or eating, and each step is a step in the right direction.

‘There’s No Elegant Way to Eat a Corn Dog’

From Gary He for Eater:

The first weekend of the 2019 Iowa State Fair had it all: a butter cow, a craft beer tent, mutton bustin’, a Slipknot museum, and 20 candidates vying for the Democratic presidential nomination. Iowa is the home of the first nominating contests that will eventually determine the nominee from both parties, and the food-on-a-stick bonanza is the stage on which candidates vie for the hearts of Iowa voters and attention of the news media.

I’m not sure why I found these photos so funny. The headline really nails it. And I’m happy to hear the Iowa State Fair had some vegan options.

Cory Booker, the New Jersey senator who is famously vegan, tracked down a fried peanut butter and jelly sandwich on a stick. “Can we settle the Democratic primary by how many of these you can eat?” he said. “I think I could take the field.”

I’d seen a few things online mention that this would be a tough spot for Cory Booker with the turkey legs and corn dog traditions, and—as a vegan—I’ve been in the same barren situation: scant options and a lot of meat. What he found sounds good to me though.

I can’t imagine it’ll be a large part of this election, though it does make me wonder if a candidate’s diet could play a role in electability the way religion used to. (Think: JFK and Catholicism.) Now, many people are as strict with their diets as middle America has been with its religion.