It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Impossible Foods, Now Valued At $2 Billion, Is The New Beyond Meat

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I'll start with media:

Forbes

gmo.geneticliteracyproject.org...

Science Alert

Let's all get on the same page here. Sorry, I won't accept circular logic websites and conspiracy hysterics as sources.
edit on 19 5 19 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk


Basically damage control. Convenient you would mention this sale to Bayer...as it only happened in July 2018. Hmmmm, isn't that curious!


Why is this convenient?

I'm not getting your angle here.


Of course Monsanto is going to want to distance themselves from Roundup. The way you phrased it was like it happened a long time ago, and it did not. The sale was less than a year ago. So while Bayer technically owns the company today, it was Monsanto who owned it from the beginning (far longer than one year). The whole sale was just to head off exactly my argument (i.e. that Monsanto owns Roundup) and nothing more. Hell, Monsanto took a 64% hit on their overall value from the sale! That's mammoth! Why would they do that???? Just to stop arguments like mine, that's why. Guilt by association.





Sorry, your statement about nothing being wrong with GMO foods is dangerously wrong!


prove it.


I'm pretty sure I just did.
edit on 5/19/2019 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

exactly. they want us eating chemicals. i know a guy who works for a chemical company. they shifted him over to food. he thinks its cool to find chemicals to replace cheese, because cheese is too expensive to put in goldfish crackers. they want less cheese, more chemicals.

he was so proud of the fact they got it right, he found the right chemicals.

which i assume means, you could put that chemical on cardboard, and sell it as cheese crackers, and it would 'taste' the same.

i did not want to insult the guy and tell him that sucks, cause some people just go with whatever george cloony, beyonce, or alg0re tell them go along with.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

No you didn't prove anything.

You made another accusation of me being a shill.

That isn't an argument.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Enlighten me...

Carcinogen = cancer causing ... No?



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Agreed, let's get on the same page. And, it does not appear our point of beginnings are the same.

I'm not sure I have an opinion really on whether GMO products are unhealthy for consumption by humans or animals. If I'm not mistaken this is where you are headed, correct?

My point is different. GMO products are produced for a reason, and one of the big reasons is to be resistant to things like herbicides and insects. So my posture is different than yours. I am not debating the dangers of people consuming GMO foods as much as two things...

1. The long term collateral damage from GMO foods is now only beginning to be understood. This was the bee example.

2. The green movement (call them Vegan, Vegetarian, PETA or whomever) want to shame people into eating what they perceive as "healthy" foods, and GMO products do not fit their definition of "healthy". Therefore, it's pretty ironic that they're willing to eat GMO foods when it comes to beef / livestock alternatives. So on this front, I'm just saying it's pretty laughable the green movement is willing to overlook GMO's when it suits them.

For the record, I'm not going to try to win your argument about the human health implications of consuming GMO foods simply because I haven't done a lot of research on the subject. So, if that's where you're headed, then you win. I will, however, debate the collateral damage caused by the GMO industry to other parts of the eco-system (which I don't believe is your argument).

Same page now?



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Double.
edit on 5/19/2019 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: DaphneApollo

You're missing the point.

I invite you to read your own sources.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

BTW...I do not think you are a shill.

I made one reference to that in a previous post, and it was just me being sarcastic. I have made no further references to your being a shill (at least none I intended to).



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: pthena
If beefing goes down I hope milking doesn't go down with it.

They are working on that as well.

A tech startup is making convincing cow-free milk by genetically engineering yeast



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22




posted on May, 19 2019 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Dude, your opinion of GMO's is about as accurate as your bitcoin investment advise.

Saying gmos are good or bad is wrong.

There are aspects of both. The Roundup side of gmos are as toxic as you can get. Soil and water destroying, cancer causing poison.





posted on May, 19 2019 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: dantanna
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

exactly. they want us eating chemicals. i know a guy who works for a chemical company. they shifted him over to food. he thinks its cool to find chemicals to replace cheese, because cheese is too expensive to put in goldfish crackers. they want less cheese, more chemicals.

he was so proud of the fact they got it right, he found the right chemicals.

which i assume means, you could put that chemical on cardboard, and sell it as cheese crackers, and it would 'taste' the same.

i did not want to insult the guy and tell him that sucks, cause some people just go with whatever george cloony, beyonce, or alg0re tell them go along with.


From what I have been seeing, food is a way of getting rid of dangerous chemical waste. Fluoride is a good example, it's a byproduct of aluminum processing. Seriously, our food should be regulated as food. It should not have tolerances for x number of parts per billion, choose-your-poison, crap in it. There should be no chemicals or anything unnatural in food.

But as I said, I believe the chemical cocktail is to limit life for the serfs. Pay into that pension fund so the ptb can take it later. Seems to be the trend with the way governments, companies and the stock market are raping pension funds.

The way things are going with chemicals in that stuff-we-eat, instead of burial s or creations, they are going to have to use plasma incinerators to break down the heavy molecules into their constituent subatomic particles to make our "death waste" allowable toxic.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 5/19.2019 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 02:07 PM
link   
They are going to keep monkeying around and have a large percentage of people eating this stuff without it properly being tested etc. Got a feeling, later on, we will find out there was something in real meat that's essential and we won't be getting enough of it through mystery meat.

Its like living without a gallbladder cant digest enough vitamins and have to take supplements but doctors are saying beef liver is an excellent source easy on the system etc. and much reliable than pills



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   
it might be a little too early for such a product to take off in America at least, the only way it will get anywhere is if it tastes as good or better than meat and even then they'll soon have competition from companies using lab grown meat that tastes exactly like real slaughtered meat.

they will have an uphill battle that's for sure, though in the end even if they fail in America it won't be a problem since the Asian markets will most likely embrace it and make them all kinds of money.
edit on 19-5-2019 by namehere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Mandroid7


Dude, your opinion of GMO's is about as accurate as your bitcoin investment advise.


I called a bull market at 3200. Bitcoin is at 8024 now.

If you had listened to me you'd have made some money.



Saying gmos are good or bad is wrong.


No it isn't. There are right and wrong answers and I believe in empirical evidence. The evidence says GMOs are safe.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: gallop

I've never found a food substitute that is even close to what its supposed to be replicating.

Not sure it will ever happen.


They are betting on that in 30 or 40years, no one will remember what steak/beef/chicken/pork/fish tastes like. That way they can just call their crap tasty (fill in meat product type) and charge big bucks for it. Like tasty beef with a carcinogenic aspertame aftertaste lol. Don't want those peasants making it to pension age after all.

Cheers - Dave


I doubt fast food today resembles anything on the menu from 30 years ago.

But at least they're being innovative now, and trying to mimic the quality of real meats.. as opposed to crap that doesn't even spoil after a decade.

And unless you've tried one of these new things, to write it off in the same vain as tofu burgers is a bit sloppy...

I've not, but I'm willing to try before I write it off, at least.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Just a small quibble...


originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

I do find it quite ironic though, people wanting something which 'tastes' like something they have something they have some moral, religious or dietary objection to.


I think it is more those refusing to give up meat who demand it be more like the real thing, before they even consider trying it.

Those with moral, religious and dietary objections are content with kale and lentles...

I don't mind vegetarian food, so I don't care. But I still Hoover down double quarter pounders like some third world kid at an all you can eat buffet.. So this appeals to me for no other reason than it's food, if it's tasty, why not.
edit on 19-5-2019 by gallop because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk I do find it quite ironic though, people wanting something which 'tastes' like something they have something they have some moral, religious or dietary objection to.


Oh I'm sure they can come up with some kind of pseudo-intellectual explanation for their irrationality.


Who? The die hard "I dun like tofu, Imma get me a steak wrapped in bacon and a bacon salad with a side order of pork chops" crew?

They already made their position clear... Those eating vege burgers aren't demanding anything...?



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: DaphneApollo



GMO Impossible Burger tests 11x higher for Glyphosate weed killer residue than Beyond Meat burger.





“We are shocked to find that the Impossible Burger can have up to 11X higher levels of glyphosate residues than the Beyond Meat Burger according to these samples tested. This new product is being marketed as a solution for “healthy” eating, when in fact 11 ppb of glyphosate herbicide consumption can be highly dangerous. Only 0.1 ppb of glyphosate has been shown to alter the gene function of over 4000 genes in the livers, kidneys and severe organ damage in rats. I am gravely concerned that consumers are being misled to believe the Impossible Burger is healthy.” stated Zen Honeycutt, Executive Director of Moms Across America.


Link to article

Now, I'm not touching this product.


Great discussion though, we learn through others' points of view.


I'd say it's not the tech that would be at fault, more where things are sourced.

And that can, and if these studies are legit, should be changed.

And the overuse of poison to regulate crops definitely must change.
edit on 19-5-2019 by gallop because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join