Not So Sure

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1993883,00.html?hpt=C2

This article worries me. First off, I want to say that I believe that the consumption and exploitation of animals is morally wrong, environmentally damaging, and unhealthy. At the same time, I fear that soy is becoming too trendy and haphazardly viewed as a flawless, healthy alternative. The mass production of soybeans is causing environmental problems and the consumption of soybeans is raising health questions as well. Perhaps it's the better option to eating meat, but it's not the best. Eating flesh no longer seems natural or spiritually acceptable to me, but neither does eating processed foods (on a natural level, anyway). I'm not claiming to be either guru or chef, nor am I claiming to never consume soy-based products, but I think that it would be more beneficial to the healthfulness of humankind to present less processed, and economically accessible options for those transitioning into an animal-free diet.

I doubt that a pound of this new fake-meat product will be cheaper than a pound of chicken. Just as Kindles isolate certain economic classes from text, oftentimes vegan dining isolates certain economic classes from healthy food. In order to successfully advocate a vegan diet it must be accessible to every single person, regardless of income level. Health should not depend upon one's daily wages. Creating flavorful and filling vegan dishes does not have to depend upon a person's income level. Creativity with vegetables (fresh or frozen) and herbs (fresh or dried) and a departure from a traditional meat-based diet mentality is a much better way to present a vegan diet. Fake meat products are more of a splurge (check out the sodium) and are fine to use on occasion, but I don't think that they are to be used as a full time replacement. A plant-based diet does not mean a soy-based diet. We need to educate those who are interested about how raw and unprocessed foods can be used to create delicious, low-cost, and hearty meals. It does not need to taste or feel like meat in order for it to be be "good food."

"What has confounded fake-meat producers for years is the texture problem. Before an animal is killed, its flesh essentially marinates, for all the years that the animal lives, in the rich biological stew that we call blood: a fecund bath of oxygen, hormones, sugars and plasma. Vegan foods like tofu, tempeh (fermented soy) and seitan (wheat gluten) don't have the benefit of sloshing around in something so complex as blood before they go onto your plate. So how do you create fleshy, muscley texture without blood?"

The texture issue is certainly valid, but again suggesting that eating "fake meat" that tastes and feels like real meat is 100% good for us carries hazards too. Perhaps faux meat should be viewed as a crutch for those in transition and as a treat for those who have been vegetarian for a while.

Consuming in vitro meat products sounds disgusting and terrifying. I neither want to base my diet around something that has been grown in a petri dish, nor churned about in a giant tub and processed through a series of machinery. I want to eat of what the soil has provided. Maybe I'm being too closed-minded and optimistic, but I think that moving away from a meat-based diet, authentic or fake, is the best option.