Skip to content


Your cart is empty

Article: [New Data] Beyond Meat vs Beef: Which is Better for You and the Environment?

Beyond Burger vs beef side by side comparison

[New Data] Beyond Meat vs Beef: Which is Better for You and the Environment?

The Surprising Truth About Beyond Meat Burgers vs Beef

There's new data you have not seen before to compare these two. Beyond Meat offers its products as a healthy, cruelty free and environmentally superior alternative to beef. But is it?

Read on and you might be surprised what you learn. 

Plant-based burgers are nothing new. What is new is plant based food specifically designed to taste and feel like the real stuff, enter Beyond Meat. 

By marketing to animal eaters, these upstart brands have a much larger financial opportunity. 

First a quick note: my company makes and sells the absolute tastiest chicken bone broth you'll ever try. Keep this in mind if you're ever looking for a healthy and convenient protein source.

I’m not against plant based versions. I think it’s important for each of us to address our relationship with animal products. How is it serving us? Do we need it? If we do, how much is necessary?

Should we Eat Less Meat?

Most of us in the west could probably benefit from eating less meat

But the caveat I always mention is this: eating less misses the point if what you do eat is from factory-farmed operations.

We should not be supporting factory farmed beef operations. 

What we must support is smaller scale farmers who are practising regenerative agriculture. 

Beyond Meat chooses to lump all animal products into one bucket: vilifying the whole industry. 

This tribalist thinking creates a powerful “us vs. them” approach to brand building. It paints the picture that all meat is bad, and we are the knight in shining armour here to save you. This type of marketing is damaging to our society.

In reality, there are many shades. You can get it from small scale farms who farm in a way that is a net positive to our planet and climate change.

Beyond Meat Company Misleading Marketing

The strategy used is threefold:

  1. Portraying a healthier alternative to beef options.
  2. Appealing to animal cruelty and ethical treatment of animals.
  3. Branding it as an environmentally friendly alternative to other pork, chicken, etc.

But is it?

I’ll outline each of these below and see if we can come to some conclusions.

Beyond Meat vs Beef Patties Nutrition For Your Health

beyond meat vs beef burger nutrition facts infographic

Regardless of dietary preference, we can agree that eating real food is healthier and safer than processed food. Is Beyond Burger real food? Let’s take a look.

The ingredients are processed vegetable oils, MSG mimicking flavour additives, artificial colours and chemical thickeners and binders. In other words, it is difficult to say that Beyond is not an ultra-processed food. 

The ingredients used have been compared to those in dog food. That is a hyperbole, but you get the point. There is some overlap.

Looking for bone broth? Read our in-depth review of the 6 best bone broths this year.

Beyond Burgers Calories

One Beyond Burger has 260 calories. There are claims that these are healthier alternatives to beef, but to what end? Calories is certainly not it because this is compared to 230 calories in a same size beef patty.

Let’s break down the ingredients.

Beyond Meat Ingredients

Beyond Meat ingredients include the following:

Water, pea isolate, expeller-pressed canola oil, refined coconut oil, contains 2% or less of the following: cellulose from bamboo, methylcellulose, potato starch, natural flavor, maltodextrin, yeast extract, salt, sunflower oil, vegetable glycerin, dried yeast, gum arabic, citrus extract (to protect quality), ascorbic acid, succinic acid, modified food starch, annatto (for colour). 

Water - a surprising first ingredient. 

Pea isolate - a chalky, flavourless powder that needs a lot of moisture to be edible. This accounts for the protein in Beyond Meat because it is the cheapest form with 9 essential amino acids that is not soy.  

One possible issue is that plant based proteins tend to be less bioavailable than animal based (1). Meaning that you may not absorb all of the amino acids from plant sources the way you do from meat sources. 

There’s early evidence that an increase in concentrated forms of pea-related foods could lead to allergies to peas. 

take the bone broth quiz

Canola Oil - 50 years ago you would have found it only in mechanics' shops as engine lubricant. Somehow food manufacturers convinced us to eat it. 

90% of the canola in Canada and 87% of canola in the US is GMO (Genetically Modified) (23). Note: Beyond Meat uses Non-GMO Canola.

Consuming canola oil is linked to impaired learning and worsened memory in Alzheimer’s disease (4). It is also theorized to be a hidden cause of diabetes and heart disease (5). 

Let’s not get too crazy though. Canola is generally recognized as safe. Moreover, Beyond Meat uses expeller pressed canola, meaning it is mechanically extracted from rapeseed as opposed to extracted using industrial solvents. I appreciate them for this.

So it is up to you to do your own research and decide if you’d like to use it. 

Refined Coconut Oil - Refined coconut oil suggests that it has been purified, but in reality it has been further processed than virgin or cold-pressed coconut oil. They use heat, extraction and bleaching to remove the coconut flavour notes. 

The next group are the same ingredients used to make glutamic acid which is specifically designed to mimic the taste and behaviour of MSG (Monosodium Glutamate). 

This is clever but not surprising given the addictive qualities of MSG. Those who are sensitive to MSG may also get similar symptoms from the following ingredients:

Yeast Extract - Often used to mimic umami flavour. Adds flavour and a ton of sodium to foods.

Natural Flavours - aka Autolyzed Yeast. Common in processed animal products. Also a sodium bomb.

Pay special attention to headaches or hives after eating these foods. These ingredients are not identical to MSG, but they are ingredients used to make MSG. 

Cellulose, Methylcellulose, Potato Starch, Arabic Gum, Maltodextrin

These can all be lumped into binding ingredients. They are the gum that holds ingredients together. They also act as a thickener and emulsifier in highly processed foods. 

Citrus Extract, Ascorbic Acid, Succinic Acid  

Preservatives and flavouring agents that are found in many processed foods. Succinic Acid is usually used to make plastic and in industrial applications instead of food. 

Sunflower Seed Oil  - a staple in almost all processed and packaged foods. High in omega-6 fats.

Vegetable Glycerin - likely needed to add more moisture to the burger, since pea isolte is quite chalky.


“Used to avoid any unwanted grey colour.” - Dariush Ajami, Ph.D, CIO at Beyond

Beyond Burgers Nutrition vs Beef Burger

Beyond Meat burger patty comes in at 4 ounces or 113 grams. We will compare it to a 80/20 beef patty of the same size raw, but after it has been cooked. I used 80/20 because that yields similar fat to Beyond Burger.

Leaner beef will have less fat, more protein and roughly the same amounts of crucial vitamins and minerals. 

As you can see there are 12% more calories in Beyond Meat. 

There is 18g of fat in Beyond Meat compared to 15g of fat in beef. Saturated fat is the similar, at 5 g and 6 g respectively. The beyond burger patty comes with 5 g of carbs and 2 g of fiber, while beef has 0. 

The big thing that stands out in this comparison is sodium. Because of the yeast extracts and natural flavours, Beyond Meat has 4X the sodium at 380 mg of Sodium which is 16% of your recommended daily intake. Beef has 64 mg which is 3% of RDI. 

As for protein, they both have 20 g per serving. Pea isolate has a great balance of all essential amino acids, meaning that Beyond is a quality source. 

Vitamins and Minerals in Beyond Meat vs Beef Burger

beyond meat vs beef burger vitamins , minerals, iron, B12 infographic

Beyond Meat packs 20 % of your daily iron compared to 11% for beef. The caveat is that plant based sources of iron are non-heme and are less absorbed than animal-based sources.

Some research suggests you need to consume 3x the amount of non-heme iron to get comparable absorption to heme (or animal based) iron sources (6). 

They both have similar levels of potassium which is an important buffer to sodium to help balance your electrolyte levels.  

Is Beyond Meat Healthier Than Real Beef?

Beyond Meat is not healthier than beef when you compare them side by side.

Beyond Meat has more calcium (100 mg vs. 18 mg) than beef. However, once we get beyond calcium into important vitamins and minerals to your health, Beyond Burger lacks all of these.

Beef has B6, choline, zinc, magnesium, phosphorus and selenium while Beyond has none of these. 

Beyond Meat provides no Vitamin B12, compared to 102% of your daily value for beef. B12 is impossible to get on vegan diets without fortified foods or supplements, so it’s a bit strange they didn’t fortify the burger with it.

There is no cholesterol in Beyond Meat, compared to 77 mg in a beef patty — about one-quarter of your recommended daily intake. 

Read the surprising benefits of bone broth for weight loss.

Taste, Texture and Flavor Considerations

Beyond Meat is a miracle of food engineering. These words are carefully used because that is exactly what they are doing.

They're engineering a food to taste like real, naturally raised ones. The texture matches that of beef.

The flavor leaves a bit to be desired. It does not taste quite like real meat. But in all honesty, it does not taste bad.

Climate Change: Is Beyond Meat Better for the Environment?

Beyond Meat is not better for the environment when you properly account for land footprints and water use. They use flawed science to assess the true impact. Let's take a deeper look shall we?

Pasture raised organic beef

One pillar Beyond Meat stands behind is that their plant based options are environmentally friendly compared to beef. 

They specifically mention you can do your part to combat climate change by eating Beyond Meat products.

There are facts and figures displayed on their website suggesting Beyond Meat uses 99% less water and 93% less land than beef.

The basis for these claims are a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) report that they commissioned (5). LCA is an environmental accounting system -- a way to add up all the environmental impacts when a product is produced from start to final disposal.

The reason I bring this up is because there are flaws in their assessment.

1. Land Footprints Research

Land footprints don’t tell us the suitability of the land to be used for multiple things. They also don’t address ecosystem services: benefits that humans get from nature and wildlife. This is critical for sustainability. 

Most land used for cattle production is grazed land that cannot be used for crops. If it were used for crops it would be harmful -- leading to erosion and loss of soil. 

Think of the land in Texas or Northern Africa. Lot’s of dry dirt, not nutrient rich soil. Try to plant crops on this and you’re in for a rude awakening.

The LCA from Beyond Meat lumps all land into one bucket.

A great way to generate food from this uncroppable land is to use cattle, sheep or goats. You physically can’t put plants on this land. 

2. Water Use Difference

99% of water footprints are attributed to producing feed for cows (7). Drinking water for the cow used less than 1 %, same with water used in processing. Feed production largely uses ‘green water (8).’ Green water is rainwater. This is where you see grossly inflated numbers. 

For example: if we have 300,000,000 acres of grazing land in Canada, all of the rain and snowfall that falls on that land which is occupied by cattle part of the year is added to the footprint for a hamburger. 

This is flawed because this rain will fall regardless of whether there is cattle on this land. 

Also, cattle are only eating a fraction of the plants that are growing with that green water on the land. And with that, they are urinating and putting back nutrition into this land.

The question is: are cattle removing water from this system, or merely cycling it? LCA’s don’t account for this in their assessment, making the numbers look really bad.

Pasture Raised Beef Environmental Impact Study

carbon emissions: regenerative farming vs beyond meat graph

Now that I’ve explained how LCA’s work and how the land and water use may not be accurate, let’s take a deeper look at pasture raised beef’s environmental impact. 

White Oak Pastures is a cattle farm that practices regenerative agriculture. They commissioned an LCA by Quantis, a third party sustainability science firm (9).

Regenerative agriculture is a conservation and rehabilitation approach to food and farming operations. It’s mission is to increase our resilience to climate change by: regenerating top soil, improving biodiversity, the water cycle and ecosystem services and rebuilding healthy soil.

The LCA shows that regeneratively managed cattle farms can not only offset carbon emissions but be a net positive to climate change. This is... shocking. More on how below.

Carbon Footprint of Beyond Meat Products

Quantis determined that the regenerative beef farm produces net total emissions of -3.5 pounds of carbon for every pound of beef produced.

This is compared to 2 pounds of carbon emissions produced per pound of Beyond Burger. I’ll note that conventional beef was measured at 33 pounds of carbon per pound produced.

Hopefully you know where I stand on conventional animal products at this point.

Regenerative Agriculture Process vs Pea Farming

Regenerative Agriculture soil building with cows

At a basic level, years of regenerative farming practices makes soil so rich in nutrients and vitality that it creates a massive carbon sink. It captures more emissions than the cows create.

The key to creating positive environmental impact from farming? Cattle and other large ruminants. Why?

Cattle can elevate the organic carbon in soil which increases its health and vitality. They walk around and provide nutrient rich manure to build up soil. Thanks to Diana Rodgers for such a great illustration of this process.

This eventually enhances biodiversity by attracting more wildlife to the area. The whole ecosystem thrives.

Moreover, cattle on land means that large monocrop operations are not on the same land. 

The Harmful Environmental Cost of Plant Protein Sources

The harmful cost to produce plant protein sources cannot be understated.

Monocrop (mono=one) are large industrial crop operations. Historically in Canada, produce corn and soy. But now pea production is getting huge.

Pea production uses industrial tillage operations, which strips nutrients from soil, making it unhealthy and unusable in the future. They take and take until the soil is unusable. 

FAO estimates we have destroyed one third of all soil on earth and have only 60 years of harvest seasons left before we completely kill our soil (10).

Monocrop operations and also rely on heavy herbicide and pesticide use from Monsanto. This is because they’ve degraded the soil so much that they need these chemicals to get anything from the soil.

Regenerative agriculture will minimize the damage from tillage and herbicides and pesticides used by monocrop operations that mainly produce corn and soy. 

Animal Meat Welfare And Ethics

A big reason why many are plant-based is due to animal cruelty concerns (11). I agree that Beyond Meat is a better alternative from an animal welfare perspective compared from industrial factory-farmed versions.

What about beef from regenerative farming systems who are pasture raised and eat grass?

What you’ll find interesting is how no one talks about the deaths from farming peas (or any other industrially cultivated vegetable). 

Cattle vs Vegetable Farm Attributed Animal Death Trends in Canada


Pea farming has quickly become industrialized agriculture, much like corn and soy. Due to the increased demand for pea products, this industry has hatched massive industrial monocropping farm operations (12). 

These large-scale farming operations are responsible for hundreds of millions of animal deaths every year. They also displace wildlife from their natural habitats whenever new land is cleared to plant more peas. 

Is there a morally relevant difference between the death of field-dwelling animals and farm-dwelling animals? Is it acceptable to eat products that cause death to millions of field mice, deer, rabbits, coyotes merely because people don’t know about it as opposed to beef that is widely publicized?

A partial list of animals of the farm field in the Canada/USA include: 

  • Pheasant
  • Rabbit 
  • Turkey
  • Vole opossum
  • Mouse
  • Rats
  • Partridge
  • Dove
  • Sparrow
  • European starling
  • Numerous species of amphibians (13)

To produce crops requires field operations that include plowing, disking, tilling, herbicides, pesticides, planting, cultivating and harvesting. 

These all kill field living animals. 

For example, mowing alfalfa caused a 50% decline in gray-tailed vole population (14). 

Rat populations on a large sugar farm in Hawaii were decreased 77% during harvest (15). 

Since these animals are seen as expendable, there are few scientific studies that measure agriculture's effects on their population. 

There’s been estimates between 52% and 77% death rate per year of all kinds of animals that make their homes on fields during agriculture production (16).

If you’ve seen the turbines used to plough pasture land, you get the idea. Animals are routinely dismembered or maimed and left for birds to eat. Also, rodents in particular are poisoned in grain storage facilities every year.

There are reports that mouse population density dropped from 25 per hectare pre-harvest to less than 5 per hectare post harvest (17). 

In 2019, Canada planted 1.6 million hectares worth of dry peas. The USA numbers are a bit lower at 416,000 hectares (18). 

Let’s do some quick math.

If we use the 25 mice per hectare population rate combined with a 60% mortality rate (a conservative measure), we come up with 15 mice deaths per year per hectare of land.

In Canada this comes out to 24 million mice deaths per year for pea production alone. And this is only mice. Not the 9 other animals I listed above. Other estimates have it closer to 100 mice deaths per year per hectare.

This fails to account for federal or state sponsored agriculture animal control programs which kill millions of bears, cougars, wolves, etc every year.

How about cows? Each year in Canada we process 3.7 million cattle (19). Cows are killed instantly while poisoned rodents suffer a long and horrible death. Far fewer lives killed per kg of food.

Peas are only one ingredient in Beyond Meat. But hopefully you get my point. Beyond Burgers are responsible for animal deaths. 

The larger point here is that these are complex issues that can’t be explained simply. There are massive implications to whatever we consume. Replacing beef with plant-based sources causes greater suffering and more sentient animal deaths. 

Closing Thoughts

Exclusively relying on grain and plant based pulses (like peas and soy) threatens native species, leads to at least 7x more animal deaths. It also destroys native ecosystems and soil. 

While Beyond Meat should be applauded for their innovation and mission, I worry we are taking a step back. We should not be replacing real food with ultra processed foods. 

The human body is incredibly smart but complex. We know from research that eating whole foods provides more nutrition than identical amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (20).

There is something about the harmony of whole foods that our body knows how to absorb. One of these rare foods is collagen rich bone broth

Introducing novel, processed foods often brings about unintended consequences. The problem is that we may not know the full extent of the long-term effects for years down the line.

Lastly, this is about how they market Beyond Meat against hard-working farmers. You’ve just read how regeneratively managed beef systems can create a net positive for the environment. Beyond Meat’s ingredient list is negative.

They publicly describe the beef sector as filthy, as inhumane, as unsafe. That is just intentionally misleading. 

During a time when we need to come together to solve global, species defining problems, they choose to use reductionist and tribal tactics. 

Are you as torn as I am? The challenge for the ethical eater is to eat in a way that causes the least amount of death and environmental damage. Oh yea, all this while covering our nutritional bases for health and longevity. 

What is beyond meat made of?

Beyond Meat is made of pea protein, canola oil and a host of meat mimicking flavors, yeast extracts, junk fillers, additives and preservatives to make it taste like beef. The ingredients used to make it mirror what you find in certain dog food brands.

What are beyond beef ingredients?

Beyond beef ingredients are the following: Water, pea isolate, expeller-pressed canola oil, refined coconut oil, contains 2% or less of the following: cellulose from bamboo, methylcellulose, potato starch, natural flavor, maltodextrin, yeast extract, salt, sunflower oil, vegetable glycerin, dried yeast, gum arabic, citrus extract (to protect quality), ascorbic acid, succinic acid, modified food starch, annatto (for colour). 


I love bone broth


I agree Bob. Single use plastic is a massive issue!

Connor at Bluebird Provisions

Another huge concern for me at least is the packaging. Beef burgers (usually) come in a plastic bag or a plastic bag in a cardboard box. Beyond patties come in a vacuum forn plastic package that uses more plastic than I’m guessing 2 – 2l pop bottles, and that’s just for 6 patties!!! But they are better for the environment right? Hmmmm….


Thanks for your comment Stephen. I really appreciate your thoughtful response and will read all of the papers you referenced to learn where some gaps in my knowledge may be. I can tell you are well versed in what is a really tricky field of study. Thanks for the objective debate and keeping things science based.


Connor at Bluebird Provisions

Thanks, some interesting materials there.

But some of the logic escapes me.
You write: “How about cows? Each year in Canada we process 3.7 million cattle (19). Cows are killed instantly while poisoned rodents suffer a long and horrible death. Far fewer lives killed per kg of food.” But that omits all the lives killed to grow the feed those cattle ate, even after you alluded to: “For example, mowing alfalfa caused a 50% decline in gray-tailed vole population”

You write: “White Oak Pastures is a cattle farm that practices regenerative agriculture. They commissioned an LCA by Quantis, a third party sustainability science firm (9).”

Be curious to know whether you think that this successfully debunks that analysis:
Study: Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System | Rowntree et. al (2020)

As you’re likely aware, ruminants grazing on grasses emit considerably more methane than those fed grain in feedlots per unit of protein output, since grass is relatively poor nutritionally and requires greater transit time in the rumen. In carefully managed systems in previously degraded areas this could be partially offset by the ruminants facilitating carbon sequestration in soil, but according to Poore and Nemecek in “Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers”: “Improved pasture management can temporarily sequester carbon, but it reduces life-cycle ruminant emissions by a maximum of 22%…”

The Food Climate Research Network’s “Grazed and Confused” report states:
“In many parts of the world the potential for grazing management to achieve sequestration is limited or absent.
• Heavy grazing is a problem on many grazing lands: by reducing plant growth, it causes carbon losses from the system.
• Evidence as to the sequestration benefits of holistic, adaptive and other variants of rotational grazing is patchy and highly contradictory. Where there are benefits, these are small.
• The highly ambitious claims made about the potential for holistic grazing to mitigate climate change are wrong.
• The sequestration potential from grazing management is between 295–800 Mt CO2-eq/year: this offsets only 20-60% of annual average emissions from the grazing ruminant sector, and makes a negligible dent on overall livestock emissions.
• Expansion or intensification in the grazing sector as an approach to sequestering more carbon would lead to substantial increases in methane, nitrous oxide and land use change-induced CO2 emissions..
• Practices that are optimal for achieving soil carbon sequestration may not be so for other environmental goals, such as biodiversity conservation.”

Other relevant analysis:
Nationwide shift to grass-fed beef requires larger cattle population

From the Sierra Club Magazine:
“Allan Savory’s Holistic Management Theory Falls Short on Science: A critical look at the holistic management and planned grazing theories of Allan Savory” by Christopher Ketcham | Feb 23, 2017

A study from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences concluded: “Some claims concerning holistic grazing are directly at
odds with scientific knowledge…” Titled, “Holistic management– a critical review of Allan Savory’s grazing method”

The review article by Carter et al in the International Journal of Biodiversity titled “Holistic Management: Misinformation on the
Science of Grazed Ecosystems” is a relatively succinct analysis of how cattle grazing is not well suited to regions such as the Western United States… as in much of the world, resting grazed lands there without livestock can be a more successful approach to recovery from overgrazing. It includes:
“Comparisons of pasture-finished and feedlot-finished beef in the USA found that pasture-finished beef produced 30% more greenhouse gas emissions on a live weight basis 91.”

and: “A review, by Fleischner 76, of the effects of livestock grazing on plant and animal communities in the western USA found that livestock grazing reduced species richness and abundance of plants, small mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, and fish compared to conditions following removal of livestock.”

From a 2018 article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science: “In this paper, we show that plant-based replacements for each of the major animal categories in the United States (beef, pork, dairy, poultry, and eggs) can produce twofold to 20-fold more nutritionally similar food per unit cropland. Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people, more than the expected benefits of eliminating all supply chain food loss.”

Stephen Ronan

Thanks for your comment MT. It sounds like you are passionate about this topic which is fantastic.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve stated all of my points with references. The nutrition data is objective, with all of the facts laid out.

Traditional medical doctors should not be who we lean on for nutrition advice, as this is not their area of specialization. Most information states that they receive around 20-25 hours of total nutrition curriculum over a 4 year degree.


Connor at Bluebird Provisions

. I would like to know which medical school this person that wrote this graduated from.
..Because the negatives of eating animal products far far out weigh the good. Farm raised grass-fed organic is great, nonetheless it is all horrendous on the digestive system among numerous other diseases it causes.


Hi Darin,

This is great and well thought out response. You make a great point that pasture raised meat is not what everyone has access or the means to consume. This article is as much about me trying to shine the light on pasture raised meat as it is about Beyond.

Your point is well taken. However, I’m not sure I agree with the apple to apple comparison. In terms of cost and availability, Beyond Meat is much closer to pasture raised meat than conventional.

With respect to pesticide use: again, the scope of this article is comparing pasture raised meat, not conventional feedlot meat. Pasture raised meat that eats grass simply does not get the same pesticide load in their diet and thus their meat as conventional.

As for cows causing erosion from eating grass. In the research i’ve come across, the complete opposite is true. Properly managed pasture raised beef that adhere to multi paddock grazing will cause the grass they eat to grow stronger. This is because they migrate and don’t eat the same grass year round. I realize this is a minority of meat. But like you said, we have to start somewhere.

Finally, the article is not meant to criticize. I think we have a lot more in common than you may expect.

We do need to work together to fix our food system. I think veggie burgers are fantastic and need to continue to innovate. There are other great options for veggie burgers. I think Beyond is simply not the best option.

Connor at Bluebird Provisions

Thanks for your comment HADEL. I can see you are very passionate about the subject and appreciate your thorough response. To each there own in terms of eating habits. I did my best to break down my thoughts in the article. Glad you too the time to read it and comment.


Connor at Bluebird Provisions

It’s great to provide “the other side of the story” but I fear that lack of specificity or context can create people “with a little knowledge” who will perpetuate false narratives.

The truth is that most meat eaten by most people IS “ultra-processed”. A Big Mac or a Whopper is NOT “Pasture Raised Beef” and I fear people looking for information on the subject of apples to apples (beyond meat vs ultra-processed meat) will compare apples to oranges (beyond meat vs ultra-expensive “Pasture Raised Beef” which it is NOT possible to have on the scale needed to feed the world.

Saying that pea protein is bad because of pesticides while THE SAME PESICIDES are used to grow the feed for industrial meat production (and it takes a LOT more pesticide to feed a cow than it does to feed a human) is a false argument. So is making the ridiculous assertion that cattle consume less water than plants (we all know they don’t). All that water not drank by cattle could be absorbed into the water table to replenish it, can be absorbed back into the air to perpetuate rainfall. Cattle are a water sink the same way that trees are, but cows don’t put down roots and so could contribute to deforestation/expansion of these dirt deserts (I’m no ecologist, just saying).

You say crops cause erosion but ignore the fact that so do cows, because they eat the grass that holds soil in place.

The truth is that runoff from cattle poop and pesticides used to grow their food poisons waterways, the water they consume depletes water tables, their farts cause methane emissions that contribute to greenhouse effect.

I want to live in a magical world where all beef is grass-fed and sustainable. Then again I also want to live in a world where all veggie burgers are health food minimally processed that are cheaper than beef and taste great.

Unfortunately I live in the real world where healthy food of ANY kind (be it grass fed beef products or organic fruits and veggies) is INSANELY expensive (at least 4 times the cost of traditional processed food).

We do the best we can. But don’t criticize people for trying to take a step in the right direction. People can’t live without protein. They have to get it from somewhere. And if it’s not meat it will be vegetables. And there will be externalities to contend with no matter WHAT people eat.

Let’s work together to find solutions instead of cherry-picking facts to make one thing looks better than another. And let’s make it clear that in the REAL world MOST people are NOT eating grass fed pasture raised happy cows but ultra-processed corn-fed misery cows.

Darin L Herrick

Veggie burgers are just a way to transition from eating corpses of tortured murdered animals, until you can make your own veggie burgers or move on to a whole food lifestyle.
But this is not about health, even though I believe eating what comes from the ground is healthier, this is about the cows pigs chickens that are not ingredients in a dish, but living breathing bleeding souls who want to live and not end up in a concentration camp having their throats cut for humans taste buds and traditions.
Theyre bodies belong to them and only them.
As for crops killing animals, it’s displacing the animals but that happens with any industry wether it’s building houses, industries, homeless shelters, anything and everything will hurt mice or insects and as the population increases and increases that’s not gonna stop
All you can do is support farms that do the best they can growing crops or growing your own garden.
This however has nothing to do with cows or pigs who escape slaughterhouses and want to live, anymore that it does to dogs in china being murdered for their taste buds.
These are exclusively not related, I’m not gonna not save a dog in china or a cow who escaped the slaughterhouse truck because farms displaced mice or insects or a bird was caught in a tractor or whatever.
I’ll still eat a veggie burger over a murdered animal on a bun, wether it was from a big farm or small or grass fed those are all marketing term as all those animals suffer the same bloody fait.
And the environmental impact raising all three farm animals to murder them and feed them and water them and displace other animals so they can graze is not necessary, everything you need comes from plants.
Read Dr Michael McGregor book how not to die


Thanks so much for reading Clive!

Connor at Bluebird Provisions

Brilliant, informative article. Unfortunately people do not follow their rationale through to the end. This article covers it all

Clive Sandrey

Leave a comment

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

All comments are moderated before being published.