In this file:

 

·         Burger King tries to dupe beef lovers with Impossible Whopper

Beef is beef, and calling a plant-based patty or cell-cultured proteins “beef” or “meat” is doing a disservice to producers and consumers alike.

 

·         Why the Plant-Based Impossible Whopper Has as Many Calories as a Beef Burger

… It’s not exactly healthy, but maybe that’s not really the point...

 

·         Burger King Drops Chopsticks Ad After Accusations of Cultural Insensitivity

… the latest brand to spark criticism on social media…

 

 

 

Burger King tries to dupe beef lovers with Impossible Whopper

Beef is beef, and calling a plant-based patty or cell-cultured proteins “beef” or “meat” is doing a disservice to producers and consumers alike.

 

Amanda Radke, BEEF Magazine

Apr 08, 2019

 

I love consumer choice — I really, really do. I love that I can walk into my grocery store and have an abundance of foods that I can tailor to fit my family’s needs and taste buds.

 

However, with an abundance of choices often comes confusion as labels scream loudly with a myriad of claims such as — vegetarian, grass-fed, organic, antibiotic-free, gluten-free, all-natural, pasture-raised, GMO-free and the list goes on.

 

This can be overwhelming for consumers, and I think anything that helps simplify choices made at restaurants and in grocery stores is a good thing.

 

A good example is the terms we use to describe certain foods. If I want apples and purchase a bag of Pink Ladies at the grocery store, I expect to find Pink Lady apples in that bag. I wouldn’t want to find something else in my bag, like grapes or oranges.

 

But they all have fructose, so why can’t we just call them all fruit and call it a day?

 

That sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? We have clear and distinct terms for various types of fruit to help distinguish these items from one another in the produce section.

 

If the produce aisle is so clear, why are retailers insisting on creating confusion in the meat aisle? If I want to buy beef or another meat product, I expect it to have come from a cow, a pig or a chicken.

 

That’s why I have a hard time understanding why plant-based protein patties can be called “veggie burgers,” or why protein cells grown in a petri dish can be called meat.

 

Nomenclature matters in discussions like this, and our consumers deserve transparency.

 

The European Union has it figured out. New proposed food labeling rules would require vegetarian burgers to be renamed as “veggie discs.” Moreover, the rule would ban the use of words like “burger,” “sausage,” and “steak” to anything that does not contain actual meat derived from animals.

 

Yet, in the U.S., it seems like alternative protein companies are allowed to use our nomenclature (and our industry’s reputation for a great-tasting product) and slap it on their fake, alternative protein patties.

 

For example, there’s Sonic’s “Slinger,” a burger patty made with 30% mushrooms. Then there’s the Beyond Burger, a patty made from gluten-free pea protein and colored with beet juice, which is available at grocery stores nationwide. And of course, there's the popular Impossible Burger, a wheat-based patty enriched with heme to mimic the meaty flavor, aroma and cooking properties of animal meat.

 

In March, the Impossible Whopper was introduced as the newest item on Burger King’s menu.

 

And, unlike Burger King’s veggie burger which is promoted to appeal to the vegetarian crowd, the Impossible Whopper is being marketed to meat eaters.

 

In an advertisement about the Impossible Whopper, Burger King secretly serves consumers the plant-based version of their iconic Whopper. The commercial shows avid lovers of the beefy burger shocked and awed that the burger they just ate didn’t actually contain any beef.

 

Now color me confused, but that ad seems awfully tone deaf to me...

 

more, including links

https://www.beefmagazine.com/beef/burger-king-tries-dupe-beef-lovers-impossible-whopper

 

 

Why the Plant-Based Impossible Whopper Has as Many Calories as a Beef Burger

"Impossible meat is meant to mimic beef as much as possible, but made entirely from plants."

 

By Yasmin Tayag, Inverse

April 8, 2019

 

Fast food giant Burger King launched its 100-percent plant-based Impossible Whopper on April 1 in St. Louis, and the reviews are in: It’s uncannily close to the real thing. And not only in terms of taste: A close look at the Burger King nutrition information shows that the Impossible Whopper has roughly the same amount of calories as the original beef-based burger.

 

The original Whopper is 660 calories, according to the Burger King website. Meanwhile, the Impossible Whopper is 630 calories. While it may seem counterintuitive — plants are supposed to be healthier than meat, right? — it’s important to remember that to make a plant-based burger taste like meat, it’s got to include the same molecular components: that is, lots of protein, and lots of fat. For Impossible Foods, the startup that makes the Impossible Whopper (which is based on its Impossible Burger), the goal of creating a vegetable-based patty is clearly not weight loss.

 

“Impossible meat is meant to mimic beef as much as possible, but made entirely from plants,” Lexi Holden, an Impossible Foods spokesperson, tells Inverse. “A quarter-pound Impossible Burger (original recipe) contains approximately the same amounts of fat and calories as a quarter-pound burger from cows, and delivers slightly more protein and iron than a burger from cows.”

 

Where Do All the Calories Come From?

 

According to the Impossible Foods website, the Impossible Burger is “made mostly of water and plant proteins with heme.” The original recipe used wheat protein; the “new recipe” used in the Impossible Whopper uses soy, which is “higher in ‘protein quality’ (a more complete selection of essential amino acids), beefier in texture, and with just a bit of dietary fiber,” the site reads. Heme is an iron-containing molecule found both in animal blood and in plants that is thought to provide a slightly metallic, “meaty” taste.

 

In addition to a soy-based protein source, the Impossible Burger includes coconut oil and sunflower oil, the latter of which was added to the “new recipe” to “reduce the amount of total and saturated fat.” Altogether, this new product has 30 percent less sodium and 40 percent less saturated fat than the original recipe, and it contains the same amount of protein as 80/20 ground beef from cows.

 

In a culture where red meat is often a target of healthy eating campaigns, it’s easy to forget that plants can produce fat too — a lot of it. A gram of either coconut or sunflower oil contains about 9 calories, and the Impossible Whopper contains 34 grams of fat. That means about half its calories are fat-derived. The rest largely come from the soy protein.

 

It’s not exactly healthy, but maybe that’s not really the point...

 

Planetary, Not Personal, Health ...  

 

more

https://www.inverse.com/article/54694-why-the-impossible-burger-has-so-many-calories

 

 

Burger King Drops Chopsticks Ad After Accusations of Cultural Insensitivity

 

By Leslie Patton and Jeff Green / Bloomberg

via TIME - Apr 9, 2019

 

Burger King is the latest brand to spark criticism on social media with an ad depicting diners struggling to eat western food with chopsticks.

 

The fast-food chain showed a video clip of diners trying to eat its new “Vietnamese Sweet Chilli Tendercrisp Burger” with large red chopsticks. Social media users say the ad, which was posted on Instagram, is culturally insensitive and plays to stereotypes. It included the caption: “Take your taste buds all the way to Ho Chi Minh City.”

 

The ad was later deleted, and Burger King issued an apology, saying it was “insensitive and does not reflect our brand values regarding diversity and inclusion.”

 

“We have asked our franchisee in New Zealand to remove the ad immediately,” the company, owned by Restaurant Brands International Inc., said in a statement.

 

While the ad has been deleted from Burger King New Zealand’s Instagram account, tweets purporting to show the original ad have gone viral, attracting over 2.7 million views.

 

Late last year, luxury house Dolce & Gabbana made a similar mistake...

 

more

http://time.com/5566429/burger-king-chopsticks-ad-criticism/