- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
I wish they’d ban the name “coronation chickpea” here.
Most people in the comments are overreacting. Nothing is banned, just the right to name your product meat if it’s not.
I’m guessing they’re trying to distract people from the fact that they’re cutting back sustainability laws even further.
“Celine Imart, the French member of the parliament who led the initiative…”
Of course it was French-led!
Damn I better go stockpile pea-based mince(d meat).
(If you haven’t tried it before, seriously, do. There’s so many (traditional) recipes with minced meat for which this is a 1:1 replacement, it opens up an entire new world of cooking for vegetarian/vegan kitchens.)
Well I think this law could be fine, depending on how far exactly it goes. I don’t really think it’s appropriate to call vegetarian products “bacon” or “steak”, however “burger” is already generic enough (you can have a beef burger, chicken burger, or veggie burger). In the article image, it says “cooks like ground beef” which should also be ok. A “pattie” is also not necessarily a specific type of meat. Hell, I even take offense at “turkey bacon” - the point is that it is intentionally misleading.
Aldi here are selling plant based products like “no chicken burger”. It’s literally saying there’s no chicken. I wonder if that will get banned.
Depends on how exactly it’s presented. There’s a fine line between saying the product is a substitute for something, and misleading people into thinking it is the thing. Like the OP picture, it says “cooks like ground beef”, which is okay in text, but on the box “cooks like” is white text on a light colour background, as if to create the possibility of you glancing at the packaging and only seeing “ground beef”.
If it’s just “No Chicken”, that’s fine, but if it’s like no CHICKEN then maybe not.
Imagine people ordering a “lentil burger”, “soy burger”, “plant burger”, “bean burger”, or “chickpea burger”, and receiving a vegan meal.
Can you imagine how shocked and deceived, perhaps even violated they may feel? The horror!
Luckily the European Christian Democrats protected European citizens from this huge and common problem instead of, oh I dunno, helping European industry with the energy transition or end a genocide. They have their priorities straight here.
Or maybe, just maybe, this is another attempt by a panicked industry to slow down the transition to a slightly less cruel food production system and these politicians are earning some side money?
EDITED for tastefulness of words. The only words I changed are the only ones that OP quoted and responded to below. The rest of the message was ignored. I actually learned a valuable lesson today, thanks Felix!
“slightly less cruel” that is a gross understatement. The comparison is night and day.
animal mass murder industry
You vegans are so funny 🤣🤣🤣
Should I call it ecocide industry then?
Lung disease spreaders industry?
Epidemic production industry?
You don’t have to care about animals at all to see the benefits of reducing meat production.
Carry on supporting “plant mass murdering industry” a. k. a. “consumer deception industry” sweetie 🤣🤣🤣
Somehow industry producing plant pulp which looks like shit and taste the same way are hell bent on calling their inferior products the same as “animal slaughtering industry”. Try to guess why. Oh, hold on, that requires more than a few brain cells and you are a vegan after all.
Well, “sweetie”, I never personally insulted you and I took the effort to link sources for my claims so I got that going for me… 🤷
How have I insulted you now sweetie? I mean, “Vegan” can be perceived as an insult so I kind of get it - but surely not for yourself?
Regarding brain cells - that’s a simple statement of fact. Vegan diet, especially not properly balanced, impacts mental health and intellectual capabilities.
You’re coming across as a complete tool, mate.
Sincerely.
And no, I’m not vegan.
they caught a ban for this already and whined in yptb
You are being very weird
Meat lobbyists forcing regulations on products that threaten the meat industry.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
Nothing will meaningfully improve
It just did. European Parliament voted for regulations protecting consumers from deception used by the plant pulp industry.
Accidentally eating a vegetable, you poor thing!
It’s not about accidentally eating vegetables, it’s about products being marketed in a misleading way. If I order a pizza with bacon on it, I don’t want turkey, let alone a vegetable substitute.
However many terms are already agnostic, eg pattie, burger; these kind of things should be allowed. Also, “cooks like ground beef” isn’t a problem, however maybe the way the words highlight “ground beef” might be. Like, the “cooks from” and “made from plants” are white text on a light coloured background, as if to try and make it easier to miss.
There are already laws against intentionally misleading people with advertising. Done properly, this is just an extension of that, to counter businesses trying to get around the current law.
Yay global warming solved! XD
/s
It’s insane seeing adults make these crying baby comments about not eating as much meat so we all don’t boil alive.
Throw out that pathetic ego, it isn’t doing you any favors.
It is. It would even be better if all the public lying was banned, not just this one.
This be the type of person to drink Scheuermilch and sue Kinder Schokolade for child cruelty.
Clearly they sipped a bit too much Scheuermilch as a kid
When has “burger” or “steak” ever exclusively meant meat from an animal? This sounds like political corruption to me. Somebody is getting paid for turning this linguistic gaslighting into law.
A “burger” has always been a mince patty of any kind and a “steak” is a thick slab of something. The default assumption may be meat, but it has never been exclusive.
Edit
OP appears to have a serious problem accepting facts. It’s disappointing given the number of upvotes Voyager shows for them. I suppose nobody is perfect.
I agree that burger has always been agnostic, but steak should really just be meat. Etymologically, it was always meat roasted on a stake. Similarly, bacon should just be a specific cut of pig meat, not turkey. Both of these are intentionally misleading marketing - with bacon it’s even so when they’re using different meats, let alone vegetables.
Intentionally misleading people through advertising, in order to get more sales, is wrong.
And don’t get me started on American “biscuits” that are not cooked twice. They’re savoury scones.
What about steak mushrooms literally their name, cauliflower steak, or something with a wooden steak in it?
After I posted this comment I looked up the etymology, the word “steak” literally comes from food being roasted on a stake. So, really, that should be the deciding factor - most steak we eat isn’t technically steak because it’s cooked in other ways.
Brazillian restaurants, the ones that come by with meat on a sword, should count as proper steak. Vegetables cooked in that manner could also be steak.
I mean… I kind of agree with you, but at the same time… Come on, the things have green packaging and “vegan” or “vegetarian” plastered all over the print. Not to mention they’re being sold in separate sections in stores, not where the meat is.
You need to really not be paying attention to get “tricked” by this.
Yeah but you shouldn’t have to be ever-vigilant against advertising. The government is supposed to regulate against businesses trying to trick people.
Like the OP picture, the box says “cooks like ground beef”, which is fine when you read it all, but the font colour is almost trying to hide “cooks like” such that at a glance you might only see “ground beef” and pick it by mistake. That’s very borderline, at least.
And while major supermarkets have vegetarian sections, smaller shops might not have such an obvious separation. You can’t justify the packaging by where the product might be shelved.
the font colour is almost trying to hide “cooks like” such that at a glance you might only see “ground beef” and pick it by mistake
Then regulate against that, not against calling them “burger patties”, or something. I mean, the choice of the image is especially weird considering “burger patties” never mention meat specifically.
And while major supermarkets have vegetarian sections, smaller shops might not have such an obvious separation
They do, because you’re not allowed to mix food products types in the EU. Meat MUST be separate from cheese, cheese MUST be separate from vegetables, etc.
Yes but are there regulations on meat being separated from meat substitutes? Would we even want that? I think it could be better to have all the burgers in one place, so long as I can clearly tell beef from pork from veggie. And should the laws on packaging rely on compliance with other laws? It’s the other way around - if the packaging is clear and appropriate, where things are placed doesn’t matter.
Cheese being separated from other things is more about hygeine. And even then, it isn’t 100% - you can buy meatballs with cheese in them. Maybe there’s some sterlisation requirement to make that okay? I don’t know.
I agree that burger should absolutely not be regulated as a meat only product. Just like how a pizza doesn’t have to have plain tomato sauce.
I did some digging to try and find a primary source, the actual vote is here (Ammendment 113, just search the page for “burger”). If you take burger and hamburger out of the list I’d have no issue.
Hopefully when the EC (ie the competent lawyers, rather than populist representatives) take their pass at this they’ll trim the list down.
Yes but are there regulations on meat being separated from meat substitutes?
Yes, because meat substitutes are not meat, therefore they cannot be stored with meat.
Would we even want that?
We already have it.
I think it could be better to have all the burgers in one place, so long as I can clearly tell beef from pork from veggie
You already can. The veggies ones have big “veggie” letters on them.
And should the laws on packaging rely on compliance with other laws? It’s the other way around - if the packaging is clear and appropriate, where things are placed doesn’t matter.
The sanitary implications of meat stored with non-meat products has much farther reaching consequences than a random person going “ah, oops, I accidentally bought veggie burgers”. Which, again, can only happen if they don’t bother looking at the package they’re grabbing.
And even then, it isn’t 100% - you can buy meatballs with cheese in them. Maybe there’s some sterlisation requirement to make that okay? I don’t know.
I’m not talking about ready-made meals or other meal types. I’m talking about “raw products”. Things like “meatballs with cheese” are not a raw product and you won’t find them in the meat fridge, they’ll be with the frozen meals section - with the pizzas, fries, deep-fry veggies, etc.
You already can. The veggies ones have big “veggie” letters on them.
No, not always. The OP photo is a good example of this, it doesn’t have any word starting with “veg” on the front. What clues there are are white text on a light colour background or vice versa, meanwhile the “meat words” are black text. The meat words are visually promoted, while the vegetarian stuff is drawn in such a way as to encourage you to miss it.
I’m not talking about ready-made meals or other meal types. I’m talking about “raw products”. Things like “meatballs with cheese” are not a raw product and you won’t find them in the meat fridge, they’ll be with the frozen meals section
That’s kind of what I was getting at, raw cheese is probably the main concern (because cheese itself is something that has to go off in a controlled way). Also, I do know supermarkets that sell raw meatballs with cheese in them in the fridge section. They’re really good, although best eaten soon after purchase…
I don’t think there is actually any regulation (yet) that would stop a shop from putting meat products next to meat substitute products. Eg, putting meat free burgers in a burger section. And I don’t think there should be.
If you do know of an actual regulation, rather than just assuming there is one, I’d like to see it.
You expect this from Texas but are shocked and disappointed when it’s the EU.
now i can’t get dino nuggies cause there’s no dinosaurs in them :(
If they’re made from chicken, which like all birds are literally extant dinosaurs, then yes there are!
This an ancient artifact of thought preservation, to be real.
Mostly because they’ll start using AI clones of bones.
It seems the meat lobby is way too strong. 🙄
They’ve been beefing it for a while.
Fuck the meat lobby. Plant meat is the real deal!
I was going to disagree with you based on etymological pedantry, but it turns out the Old English “mete” just means “food” so now I have to agree with you based on etymological pedantry.
Fuck’s sake, 2nd time that’s happened to me in this thread. I thought steak should just be beef, but it turns out:
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.
I don’t even want to look up bacon now, I need to believe that it should just be pig.
Just like how the rules forbidding plant milk to be called milk make no sense. Plant milk has existed for many centuries.
“Plant milk” could be a bit like “berry” though, in that as we have consolidated and rationalised our definitions it falls out of it. When we tried to come up with a clear idea of what a “berry” is we ended up excluding almost everything that has “berry” in the name. Like how tomatoes are fruits by the technical definition of a fruit.
Except for the fact that the reason plant milk is being excluded is entirely commercial lobbying, rather than a scientific or rational definition.
Based (dis)agreement
Is this like algebra where the order of operations matters?
If plant “meat” is real, it would be part of the same lobby. It’s not meat. Just call it something else.
The terms burger and steak don’t describe the contents of the food but the shape. And the word meat, in English, doesn’t exclusively meant the flesh of an animal. So calling something vegan meat, or soy burger, is exactly the description a costumer would need. Anything else would be either a convoluted name or less descriptive.
And a pizza is simply flat bread with sauce and toppings. Come at me, Italians.
Most “tradicional food” as we know it is less than a century old and made of pure marketing.
I will call it “animal-cruelty free meat” then.
It’s meat because it looks and tastes like meat. Simple as.
It’s not meat, it’s a meat substitute.
You can say it is a replacement for the thing, you can’t say it is the thing. Simples.
Yeah, and you’re fed farmer propaganda. Cya. :)
Yay, glad to see you understand reasoning and don’t just close off into your biased little echo chamber.
You need a dash to be Free-Meat.
Don’t feed it to a GNU/Linux nerd though. They might misunderstand their own epiphany.
tastes like meat
The closest one to taste like meat that I’ve tried is beyond burger, which in all fairness tasted like a terrible beef burger, while costing like a premium one and being uber processed.
Each one can do what they want, but I’ll take a bean burger that doesn’t pretend otherwise before any fake meat.
Well you’re not allowed to call it a “bean burger” anymore cause that would be coNfUSInG according to the animal mass murder lobby.
Well you’re not allowed to call it a “bean burger” anymore cause that would be coNfUSInG according to the animal mass murder lobby.
Can you find a primary source for this? Because all I see is articles that may well be clickbait. I want to see what they actually voted on.
I think certain terms are definitively meat, eg steak, but saying a burger is exclusively meat is like saying a pizza must have plain tomato sauce.
In any case, this hasn’t been finalised yet as the European Commission - the actual competent lawyers rather than populist representatives (who might not actually represent their voters) - have yet to have their say. I’d hope that common sense would withdraw “burger” from any law that comes out of this.
Edit: With (far too much) digging I managed to find what they voted on, and it does indeed include burger: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2025-0214_EN.html Ammendment 113, if you just search the page for “burger” you’ll find the list of terms.
These names include, for example:
— Steak — Escalope — Sausage — Burger — Hamburger — Egg yolk — Egg white.I’m not mass producing, selling or advertising them, so this ruling doesn’t apply to me.
I guess it’s a good thing then that no one will be allowed to buy the bean burger you just praised from anyone in Europe?
Imagine people ordering a “lentil burger”, “soy burger”, “plant burger”, “bean burger”, or “chickpea burger”, and receiving a vegan meal. Can you imagine how shocked and deceived, perhaps even violated they may feel?
The horror! Luckily the European Christian Democrats protected European citizens from this huge and common problem instead of, oh I dunno, helping European industry with the energy transition or end a genocide. They have their priorities straight here.
Or maybe, just maybe, this is another attempt by the animal mass murder industry to slow down the transition to a slightly less cruel food production system and these politicians are earning some blood money?
Ok OK you win. It’s a bean patty.
I’ll go to eat some rare steaks now. Real beef, of course.
Well that’s a dumb fucking take.
Facts don’t care though, because it’s what it is: it’s meat, just without animal suffering.
sam o nella has got some research on it
and iirc he loves meat so yeah. basically animals are put into concentration camp-like conditions, except they overfeed them, and then kill them in cruel ways and with horrifying efficiency.
I don’t give a fuck about the animal cruelty part… it’s different food, just call it something different. What’s so difficult to understand?
Aight, if animal cruelty is no problem, fair. That’s valid. We’re all humans, after all.
So, I take it you then don’t object to being stuffed with pesticides, herded with thousands of people in a crammed space, and transported off with a truck to slaughter, where you get stunned, electrically tortured, chopped and cut into bits, with your skin being used for leather?
Just want to let you know that the meat industry is doing exactly what people did to the Jews many years ago.
I followed your instructions and called it something different; animal-cruelty free meat. Why do you feel attacked for something that does not affect you in the slightest?
You make a valid point off subject. Have you seen the Epstein files yet?
Again with the animal cruelty. This isn’t about animal cruelty. I welcome lab grown meat, which is actually meat. I just don’t understand why there is a need to imitate the meat industry. They can create new things, better things, and it doesn’t have to be related to the meat industry at all. Now it’s something similar tasting but not quite the same food. If it’s labeled as something completely different maybe it would get more popular.
Plant meat
There is no such thing.
What a wasteful non issue. Then again, wastefulness suits the meat industry and it’s lobby very well
I’m throwing out the terms BURGR, SAUSGE, STEK as prior art so nobody can trademark them and everybody that produces vegetarian or vegan food can use them free of charge.
Some brands are already doing stuff like this. Here in Sweden we have “Ch*cken style”, “Chick-un” etc. And some are pretty funny but does break these new shitty rules like “meat-free meatballs”.
I don’t think thats how trademark law works, but I appreciate the energy
