Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

Re:Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to t... by moate on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @01:06PM (#18857774)

"Most" doesn't mean "only". Non-heme iron is real, I promise.

Hell they could really cheat and just throw ferrous sulfate directly in the mix rather than using naturally occurring iron in the veggies.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to t... by DDebbieDDowner on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @01:51PM (#18858288)

"Most" doesn't mean "only". Non-heme iron is real, I promise.

No, it means that the Non-heme is less bioavailable i.e less efficiently absorbed from the body.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to t... by moate on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @02:27PM (#18858715)

If I give you 100G of iron at 10% bioavailabilty , and Tom 10G at 100% absorption, who absorbed more iron?

If you insist on reading the statement as "this burger has non-heme iron at quantities comparable to heme iron in meat that will also be just as bio-available" then yes, it's impossible.

However, I was trying to point out that there are several ways of reading that statement without it being marketing doublespeak.

TL;dr- I think we're arguing different points here.

[ Parent | on HN ]