B2 — THE OBSERVER & BAKER CITY HERALD
HOME & LIVING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2021
Best (and worst) of alternative proteins P
By JENN HARRIS
Los Angeles Times
There is an entire uni-
verse of alternative proteins
that mimic beef, chicken,
pork and fi sh. There’s even
a hunk of mycelium (the
fi bers that make up nature’s
fungal network) created to
look, feel and taste like a
chicken breast.
What follows are the
results of our (somewhat
subjective) taste test of
more than two dozen alter-
native proteins, evaluated
on appearance, texture,
taste and how closely each
one mimics the original
protein. There are names
you’ve heard of (giants that
have pushed their products
into every major grocery
store chain and a growing
number of fast-food restau-
rants) along with many
newbies. Come, take my
sanitized hand and grab a
fork as we enter this vast
alt-protein world together.
Burgers
• Impossible Foods
Burger Made From Plants
Base ingredient(s): Soy
and potato proteins
Appearance: Of all the
alt-proteins we tried, this
product most resembled
the look of the original —
actual ground beef with a
pale red color and juice that
was almost bloody.
Texture: Uncooked,
the protein felt like a pile
of small, hard, wet nubs
that were loosely jammed
together. Cooked, it fi rmed
up and had a chew that was
similar to the real thing.
Taste: Like bland, salty,
cooked meat.
How close it is to the real
thing: 8 out of 10. With the
appropriate condiments and
a good bun, you could fool
a carnivore.
• Beyond Meat Beyond
Burger
Base ingredient(s): Pea
protein
Appearance: A grayish
color reminiscent of oxi-
dized meat.
Texture: Soft and
rubbery.
Taste: Oddly sweet but
primarily salty without any
beef fl avor.
How close it is to the real
thing: 5 out of 10.
Chicken nuggets,
tenders and breast
• Nowadays Original
Nuggets
Base ingredient(s):
Yellow pea protein
Appearance: Breaded
and shaped like blobs that
resemble nuggets.
Texture: The breading
was nice and crisp, but the
interior of the nugget was
like a kitchen sponge.
Taste: Like what I
imagine an actual sponge
tastes like, although when
I bit into it, salty liquid
rushed out. There was a
faint pea taste as well that
was rather off -putting.
How close it is to the real
thing: I suspect that who-
ever developed these nug-
gets has never tasted an
actual nugget. 1 out of 10.
• Daring Breaded Pieces
Base ingredient(s): Soy
protein concentrate
Appearance: The gold-
en-brown coating had the
look and feel of a chicken
tender.
Texture: Tough and
elastic (like a fi rm rubber
band) with shreds you could
pull apart.
Taste: Amazingly, the
tenders tasted like pumpkin
spice with notes of ginger
and nutmeg.
How close it is to the real
thing: Because the tenders
tasted like Thanksgiving, 2
out of 10.
• Impossible Foods
Nuggets
Base ingredient(s):
Wheat fl our and soy protein
concentrate
Appearance: Like a fast-
food chicken nugget.
Texture: The thin
coating gave way to a
pressed-and-formed middle
with that classic nugget
yoga-mat texture.
Taste: Almost like a
Wendy’s chicken nugget.
Almost. But what it lacked
in taste, it made up for in
appearance and texture.
How close it is to the real
thing: 8 out of 10. If you
add some sweet and sour
sauce, 9 out of 10.
• Beyond Chicken Plant-
Based Chicken Tenders
Base ingredient(s): faba
bean puree
Appearance: Because of
their rounded shape, they
look like elongated nuggets.
Calling them a tender is
misleading!
Texture: More pressed
and formed like a nugget
than an actual piece of solid
chicken.
Taste: Salty and juicy.
Your brain registers some-
thing meaty without any
real fl avor.
How close it is to the
real thing: 2 out of 10 — if
you’re calling it a tender.
If you judge it as a giant
nugget, 6 out of 10; 8 out
of 10 if you add barbecue
sauce to the equation.
• Meati Chicken myce-
lium chicken
Base ingredient(s):
Mycelium
Appearance: Like a
frozen, precooked breast of
chicken.
Texture: You get the
chew of cooked chicken and
a rush of juice when you
bite into it. The sensation is
pretty remarkable.
Taste: Like a bland, over-
cooked chicken breast that’s
been seasoned heavily with
salt.
How close is it to the
real thing: 8 out of 10. For
the most part, you think
you’re eating chicken. In a
blind taste test, I’m not sure
anyone would be able to tell
the diff erence.
Availability: The myce-
lium chicken hasn’t offi -
cially launched, so we’ll
have to stay tuned.
Pork (sausage,
bratwurst and bacon)
• Impossible Sausage
Made From Plants
Base ingredient(s): Soy
protein concentrate
Appearance: Cooked,
there’s no distinction
between Impossible sausage
and pork sausage.
Texture: It crumbled like
ground pork and had the
same satisfying chew.
Taste: Hints of garlic
powder, onion powder and
cayenne pepper — it resem-
bled well-seasoned ground
pork.
How close it is to the
real thing: 9 out of 10. In a
breakfast burrito, it would
be a perfect 10.
• Beyond Meat Beyond
Breakfast Sausage
Base ingredient(s): Pea
protein
Appearance: No notice-
able diff erences between
the links or patties and the
real things. They are the
right shape and color.
Texture: When you cook
the sausages in a pan, a thin
fi lm forms like a crust on
the surface, and it’s sticky.
The actual sausage meat
is softer and chewier than
pork.
Taste: Both the links and
patties were on the sweeter
side and tasted like sau-
sage that had been dipped
in syrup. They were both
pretty salty as well.
How close it is to the real
in Albany, New York,
but there are plans for a
national rollout.
Fish (raw tuna, cooked
tuna, crab cakes and
fi sh burgers)
Ricardo DeAratanha/Los Angeles Times-TNS
From the bowl, clockwise, Impossible breakfast-style pork sausage,
Beyond breakfast sausage links, Beyond breakfast sausage patties,
Beyond Meat beyond sausage.
Ricardo DeAratanha/Los Angeles Times-TNS
From top left, OmniPork plant-based meat-style luncheon, Omni-
Pork ground plant-based pork and OmniPork plant-based pork-
style strips.
thing: 6.5 out of 10.
• Beyond Meat Beyond
Sausage
Base ingredient(s): Pea
protein
Appearance: Uncooked,
the sausage is paler than
most. Cooked, it looks like
your average bratwurst.
Texture: Soft and mealy.
There’s no snap with the
casing; it just kind of melts
into the meat.
Taste: It doesn’t really
taste like much of anything,
although it’s a good canvas
for condiments.
How close it is to the real
thing: 4 out of 10. It looks
like a bratwurst, but that’s
where the similarities end.
• Nature’s Fynd Meatless
Breakfast Patties
Base ingredient(s): Fungi
protein trademarked as Fy
Appearance: The per-
fectly round shape and
brown color make it look
like plastic play food.
Texture: On the rubbery
side, but so is most break-
fast sausage.
Taste: Salt. It was salty.
That was it.
How close it is to the real
thing: 5 out of 10.
Availability: For now,
you can fi nd the patties
at the two Berkeley Bowl
locations in California.
• OmniPork Ground
Base ingredient(s): Soy
protein concentrate
Appearance: It looked
more like ground chicken
or turkey than pork, with a
pale pink color.
Texture: Chewy and
tough
Taste: Salty and just a
tad sweet. There was no
pork fl avor.
How close it is to the
real thing: 5 out of 10. To
make the protein a viable
pork substitute, you’ll need
to dress it up with appro-
priate condiments and more
seasoning.
• OmniPork Strips
Base ingredient(s): Soy
protein concentrate
Appearance: There’s no
reason to create a plant-
based version of pulled
pork. You’re not fooling
anyone with these brown
shards and slivers.
Texture: The strips taste
more like fi rm tofu than
anything close to meat. And
instead of shredding, it rips
into pieces.
Taste: No
How close it is to the real
thing: 0 out of 10.
• OmniPork Luncheon
Base ingredient(s): Pro-
tein blend (soy protein con-
centrate, vital wheat gluten
and soy protein isolate)
Appearance: Rounded
corners — like Spam —
with a familiar pink color.
Texture: Uncooked,
the protein is loosely held
together in a mold but
barely holds its shape on its
own. Cooked, it’s soft and
pliable.
Taste: Nowhere on the
package does it say that this
is meant to mimic Spam,
but its description on the
website reads: “Luncheon
meat is one of the most
popular processed meats
in Asia, but its potential
health risks concern con-
sumers.” The OmniPork
version packs a punch of
salt like Spam, but that’s
about it. It’s a hunk of salty,
soft meat.
How close it is to the real
thing: 2 out of 10. It may
look a little like Spam, but
it doesn’t nail the texture or
that processed-meat fl avor.
• MyEats MyBacon
Base ingredient(s):
Mycelium
Appearance: Raw, it
looks like a fl attened mush-
room processed to look like
a strip of bacon. Cooked, it
does resemble that bacon
strip— with striping that
runs its length.
Texture: Even if you
follow the directions and
turn it often, it never really
gets crisp. After what felt
like an hour of cooking (it
was really about 15 min-
utes), MyBacon remained
chewy.
Taste: There was a
strong artifi cial-smoke
fl avor that reminded me of
dog treats.
How close it is to the real
thing: 0 out of 10.
Availability: The
product is available only at
Honest Weight Food Co-op
• Kuleana Tuna
Base ingredient(s):
Radish, algae and bamboo
fi ber
Appearance: Sliced thin
and draped on top of a roll
or chopped fi ne and stuff ed
into maki, it’s passable as
actual tuna, but over time,
the color darkens and turns
purple, ending the elaborate
charade. (At the moment,
you can get it only as sushi
at Erewhon or in bowls at
Poké Bar restaurants.)
Texture: It slices like
tuna but the texture is any-
thing but tender. It has a
slight crunch that gives way
to mush.
Taste: Fresh fi sh isn’t
supposed to have a fi shy
fl avor or odor. Kuleana ends
up tasting and smelling like
aged tuna. The fi shiness is
present but not off -putting.
How close it is to the real
thing: 4 out of 10. It doesn’t
quite nail the texture or
fl avor.
• Finless Foods Plant-
Based Tuna
Base ingredient(s):
Melon
Appearance: The chunks
of protein look more like
squares of watermelon than
tuna with a deep red color.
Texture: Imagine over-
ripe, waterlogged melon
that’s still crisp but starting
to turn.
Taste: Now imagine
that melon but salty, with a
potent seaweed fl avor.
How close it is to the real
thing: 1 out of 10.
Availability: The product
will be available at select
stores beginning spring
2022.
• Good Catch Plant-
Based Fish Sticks (and Fil-
lets) Breaded
Base ingredient(s):
Wheat fl our and Good
Catch’s “six-plant protein
blend” (pea protein isolate,
soy protein concentrate,
chickpea fl our, faba pro-
tein, lentil protein, soy pro-
tein isolate and navy bean
powder)
Appearance: The fi n-
ger-sized sticks simulate
actual fi sh sticks, especially
after a couple of minutes in
the air fryer. The fi llets are
dead ringers for fried fi llets
of fi sh.
Texture: The coating
is crisp, but there’s no
fl aky fi sh texture in either
product. Instead, it just kind
of breaks apart.
Taste: A bland, salty,
protein-like substance
coated in breadcrumbs.
Both products could benefi t
from tartar sauce and some
ketchup.
How close it is to the
real thing: 4 out of 10. The
texture is way off , but if
someone marketed them as
breaded protein sticks and
never mentioned the word
fi sh, I might appreciate
them a little more.
• Good Catch Plant-
Based Crab Cakes Breaded
and Plant-Based Crab
Cakes New England Style
Base ingredient(s): Good
Catch’s six-plant protein
blend
Appearance: Both
resembled crab cakes. The
breaded product had a
nice golden crust, and the
New England style product
looked like lumps of plant-
based fi sh.
Texture: I was impressed
with both versions, espe-
cially the New England
style. The chunks of protein
were similar to lump crab
meat with a variety of sizes
pressed together to form the
cake. There were also bits
of bell pepper and green
onion that gave both cakes a
more realistic look and feel.
Taste: The cakes were
seasoned well with lemon
juice, onion powder,
paprika and garlic powder.
Any discrepancies in tex-
ture were mostly masked by
the fl avor, which really did
taste like a traditional crab
cake.
How close it is to the real
thing: 8 out of 10.
• Good Catch Plant-
Based Fish Burgers Classic
Style
Base ingredient(s): Good
Catch’s six-plant protein
blend
Appearance: A round,
fairly bumpy patty of pro-
tein, similar to what you’ll
fi nd at your local market.
You can make out frag-
ments of what look like
diced celery and green
onion.
Texture: The cakes were
larger versions of the crab
cakes with a texture that
mirrored lump crab meat.
Taste: A mild citrus
fl avor with some onion
powder and garlic powder
in the mix. You might not
mistake it for fi sh, but it
was enjoyable as a well-sea-
soned patty.
How close it is to the real
thing: 6 out of 10.
• Good Catch Plant-
Based Fish Cakes Thai
Style
Base ingredient(s): Good
Catch’s six-plant protein
blend
Appearance: Your
average fi sh cake but with a
green tint.
Texture: Clumps of pro-
tein are mashed together
like a fi sh cake with a nice,
crisp exterior.
Taste: I would actually
seek these out, and pos-
sibly serve them at a dinner
party. The cakes were fl a-
vored as advertised — with
a strong hit of lemongrass
and lime juice, garlic and
chile.
How close it is to the real
thing: 10 out of 10. I can’t
remember the last time —
or if I’ve ever — eaten a
real Thai-style fi sh cake,
but I’d like to think all ver-
sions taste similar to this
one.
• Good Catch Fish-Free
Tuna Naked in Water
Base ingredient(s): Good
Catch’s six-plant protein
blend
Appearance: Slick,
glossy, and it clumps in the
pouch.
Texture: More like soft
tofu than fi rm tuna; the pro-
tein doesn’t fl ake, it just
kind of breaks apart.
Taste: The fermented
seaweed odor was hard to
stomach and smelled like
fi sh food. And I’m guessing
it had the same taste — like
something dead in a fi sh
tank.
How close it is to the real
thing: 0 out of 10.
When your computer is in despair
OUTSTANDING
COMPUTER REPAIR
Fast and Reliable
MOBILE COMPUTER SUPPORT
DALE BOGARDUS 541-297-5831
215 Elm Street La Grande • (541) 963-5440
northwestfurnitureandmattress.com