By making the comparison only for the environmental aspects most important for meat products, the results may look extra positive for the vegan alternatives, as other aspects might have shown a less favourable result. The results as presented may be true, but they are not the whole truth.
Importantly, the studies compare the results for the vegan burgers with a beef burger produced in the United States.This is a valid choice, because this is the default burger meat in the US market. But results may be very different for other animals, for beef in other countries, or for unconventionally farmed beef.
The White Oak farm sequesters so much carbon in its soil and vegetation it more than offsets the emissions of its cattle. In other words, it has a negative carbon footprint. This study compared White Oak beef favourably to conventional beef, chicken, pork and soy, as well as the Beyond Burger. The silent assumption is, however, that no carbon sequestration occurs in conventional beef grazing or on feed and soy cropping land. This is not necessarily true.
Products like this will always say they are better than what is already around to get free publicity
ABCRural Every whale we harvest saves the lives of 80 billion krill. KrillArePeopleToo
I wasn't all that fussed with my first try eating vegan burgers.... but apparently they say to remove the vegans body hair prior to mincing.
No.
Obviously the hot topic around TheirABC's staff water-cooler today.
oxymoronic.