Impossible is great in burgers, pretty much can’t tell a difference. Beyond I don’t like as much, something about it being a bit soft and veggie tasting
I don't get this at all. Why? So long as it's labeled appropriately (ingredients, possibly some disclaimer if required but I think that would be absurd) why not call it whatever we want? Meat is already a somewhat ambiguous term in English, so giving it legal protection seems odd to me.
Personally I think we shouldn't sell juice that's from concentrate as 100% juice, but I can easily find out by reading the ingredients so I don't care. And for those who don't already specifically buy juice that isn't from concentrate, enjoy discovering that almost all juice is from concentrate (and hopefully realize how much better it tastes when it's not). It's like ice cream that's been melted and refrozen. It may have the same ingredients but it doesn't have the same taste.
Juice from concentrate is still the juice of its original source - no one is taking the juice of an orange and calling it apple juice. The water has been removed somewhat for ease of storage and packaging and probably also as a side-effect of pasteurization.
While we do informally refer to the edible portion of certain vegetables as meat, that is absolutely not the same thing as meat from animal sources and I doubt there are few who would confuse that in an informal setting.
But do the plant-based meat replacements contain enough material from those same “meaty” vegetable sources to justify calling them meat more formally in the same manner that we would call animal protein meat?
Given that food is one of the things we have to have to survive, along with air and water, it seems disingenuous to argue that manufacturers and marketers should be able to so blatantly lie about the source materials of that food. Using a formal term, other than meat, would help to reduce confusion about the source material and set it apart from animal proteins, allowing the consumer to make a more informed choice.
