this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
75 points (96.3% liked)

Vegan

1115 readers
1 users here now

A community to discuss anything related to veganism.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AnalogNotDigital@lemmy.wtf -1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Honestly good for them. They aren't 'meatless meatballs' they are something else.

[–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 3 points 6 days ago

You can adopt different terms, or use foreign terms. Very common, I think turkey has a lot of vegan meatball alternatives all labelled 'kofte'

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Chicken" and "Pork"? Sure, understandable... I guess. If they were going after, "Milk" that would be a whole other thing.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They did this in Germany! Oat milk can't legally be called "milk", so it's instead "oat drink".

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That seems ridiculous to me considering coconut milk has been called as such since the 1700s and I haven't seen a coconuts nipples.

[–] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 35 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] november@lemmy.vg 30 points 1 week ago
[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

It absolutely is, especially since there are products with "milk" in their name that aren't edible (e.g. "Scheuermilch", apparently scouring cream in English). It's nothing but populism and lobbying.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

And almond milk is almost 1000 years old, and Middle-English called it "almonde mylk"

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/almond_milk

So yeah, Big Dairy propaganda

[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Seems like a great test to see if your government is far-right.

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

passed in France too. More to do with the meat lobby than far right.

also, I met meat fanatics even among anarcho-communists 🤷 they were even the majority 🤦

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 days ago

Well I never.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Product labels in general need to be more clear. I'm mildly allergic to soy, and half my grocery shopping is squinting at ingredient labels. I can't even get the cheap peanut butter any more, because you have to pay twice as much if you want just peanuts in it.

My doctor wants me to avoid legumes in general, but *laughs in poverty*

[–] kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

Where would you expect the ingredient information to exist if not on the ingredient label?

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Absolutely OK. If "something something X" is the name of your product, it needs to contain X to a certain degree. If there was no strawberry in strawberry jam, you would complain. If there was no cinnamon in a cinnamon bun, this would be wrong, too.

The term "Vegan Chicken Chips" for a product that does not contain chicken is simply like "Apple Sauce" without apples.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What about bacon chips that contain no bacon?

Or that's alright because it's bacon spices?

Lmao people are stupid.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago

I've seen those in a shop once. I consider them an abomination. They are basically a maize flip with brown stripes and some ominous "bacon flavor". And it was labeled as "vegan", so whatever this "bacon flavor" was made of is suspicious at least. Probably something like "natural strawberry flavor" which is made from wood...

[–] stay_on_target@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Rocky mountain oysters contain no oysters. Head cheese is not cheese. Hen of the woods is not a bird. Welsh rabbit includes 0% rabbit. Ants on a log, Cowboy caviar, Bear claws... refried beans are.. gasp.. only fried once.

Its all made up and the points don't matter, until you start threatening profits.

[–] budget_biochemist@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 week ago

Jerusalem Artichokes are neither artichokes nor from Jerusalem.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Indeed. Time to clean up some of those names, too.

[–] Beastimus@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 days ago

Or just accept that that's not how language works?

[–] monogram@feddit.nl 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I keep saying the meat alternative producers need to come together and make new words and all use the same ones

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 week ago

Part of the problem is with discoverability. If you make a completely new word, people have no idea what your product is like, so they're unlikely to try it.

I think the best solution for them is to use words similar to the animal product, but obviously different, like "chick'n" or "chickenless" for example. I prefer the latter because it's more explicit about not being chicken.

But yeah, getting some standardization on it would be a big step in the right direction.

[–] Denvil@lemmy.one 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I had vegan bacon at one point, and it was NOT bacon, not even close. But it WAS good, it just needs an entirely different name.

[–] snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In my experience vegan food is a lot better when it's not trying to pretend to be meat

[–] solbear@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I very much agree, but having these "substitutes" was something that facilitated cutting out meat for me, as all cooking I used to know revolved around meat as the main ingredient. In that sense these product serve a usefulness in reducing the threshold to move away from meat in the first place.

I guess it makes sense from a transitional perspective and I imagine they've gotten better over time. The last time I remember having a substitute it was much worse than the actual thing though.

[–] monogram@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago

Bakon, Börger, Chicin, Laam, Mætbølls, Shnittsel

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Absolutely fine with that idea.

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

the problem is that they're banning words like "steak" which isn't about ingredients

The word steak was written steke in Middle English, and comes from the mid-15th century Scandinavian word steik, related to the Old Norse steikja 'to roast on a stake', and so is related to the word stick or stake.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

The point here is that nobody really cares for middle English name origins. Ask 100 random people what "steak" is, and I'd be surprized if you did not get at least 99 answers that it's meat.

[–] Praxinoscope@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

How much butter is in peanut butter?

[–] kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago

There aren't even any nuts in it! It's all a lie!

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Or in Shea butter, yes.

[–] TwanHE@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

That's why it shouldn't be called peanut butter anyways. Let's name it something logical like peanut cheese (pindakaas)

[–] november@lemmy.vg 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Indeed a shitty name, too.