Talk:Meat analogue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on food and drink on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Comment 1

Um, as far as I can tell, Green Giant does not produce meat analogues of any kind. They sell canned vegetables, which I suppose could be seen as a meat substitute, but that's it. Their packaged dinners have chicken in them. Does anyone else have evidence to the contrary? Does the chicken fall under the category of "Surimi"? Grammar nazi 06:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meatless foods and lactose intolerance

"The market for meatless foods includes ... lactose-intolerant people"

I am unable to think of any connection between Lactose intolerance and meat vs. meatless products. AFAIK, meat doesn't contain lactose (at least not in any appreciable quantities) and need not be avoided on grounds of lactose intolerance. Right? -- Writtenonsand 22:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree and I removed it. Perhaps the original author meant milk substitutes like soy-milk. But that is not the scope of this article. Jdufresne 00:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Veat (and other 'V' names)

"The most used term in English for meat analogues is 'fake meat'..."

Is there any source on this? This part of the article goes on to rank the popularity of the various names (including "veat") used to describe meat analogues, and it seems unliekly that such information could be considered valid, or be obtained at all, without some sort of survey. This survey should in turn be cited as a reference. --Mr.aluminumsiding 21:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

"One firm attempted to trademark the pre-existing term 'veat,' but may now be out of business."

Actually, they appear to be in business, though there was no indication from their website ([1]) as to whether or not the word "veat" had been successfully registered as a trademark. --Mr.aluminumsiding 21:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

"There appears to be little or no non-commercial use of the termsː 'vam' (vegetarian ham), 'veef' (vegetarian beef), 'valmon' (vegetarian salmon), 'vausage' (veggie sausage) , 'vicken' and 'vurkey.' In the case of venison a vegetarian alternative is allegedly called 'v'venison' (pronounced viv- ven'is on), and goat is 'voat'."

This hardly seems worth mentioning in such detail; particularly the term "vvension," which fails the test of basic skepticism, not mention a quick Googling. Howoever, as I am not a strict vegetarian, I put the question out there to those who are: are any of the above terms used or useful? --Mr.aluminumsiding 21:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard any of those terms. Really no point in mentioning them. isblueacolor 21:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, I just got rid of that whole section. It seems totally pointless, there's no citation for these "statistics," and the grammar reeks. isblueacolor 22:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)