The World Needs Vegan Keto/LCHF Huel


#1

I have switched to LCHF and thus have not used Huel for some time now, but I still occasionally visit this forum. I do this because I have a lot of fondness for both the company and the amazing community here, and also because I still hope that one day I will be greeted with an announcement that an LCHF/ketogenic/keto version of Huel is in the making.
I do think that the world desperately needs LCHF Huel. I have noticed a troubling trend in the LCHF/keto movement – more and more people are made to believe in the false dichotomy that it is either vegan or keto, one of them is a healthy lifestyle choice, the other is not. The movement is becoming more radical — a perfect example is the Carnivore Diet. I feel that having such a great company as Huel offer a healthy vegan alternative for keto/LCHF community is very important at this point in time.
And no, LCHF/ketogenic Huel should not be viewed as a weight-loss product (even though it could, of course, be used for that purpose). There are many threads on this forum where this has been discussed (one example: https://discuss.huel.com/t/lower-carb-huel-keto/7914/16?u=triquetra011 ).


#2

Actually, a lot of vegans would be interested in high carb, low fat version. Both options are worth consideration as for now there are no such products on the market.


#3

True, but a vegan HCLF diet is very easy to follow (I would say, it happens almost naturally). What requires much more knowledge and effort is a vegan LCHF/keto diet – therefore I believe this niche is there for the taking. More importantly, LCHF/keto is going mainstream, and if the current trend continues, because of the false dychotomy mentioned in my previous post, a lot of people will be radicalised and turned into anti-vegans, which, I believe, would be bad for the world. Having a healthy, vegan convenience food, like LCHF/keto Huel, would help immensely.


#4

What’s bad for the world are people eating big amounts of dairy, meat and other animal products

LCHF may be many things, but rarely is it environmentally sustainable.

I support this idea.


#5

Exactly! Thank you for your support, @Squizzle! Vegan LCHF/keto requires quite a lot of knowledge and effort, and most people will just follow the path of least resistance, and dramatically increase consumption of foods from animal sources (see: the carnivore diet being probably one of the most extreme examples). The world really does need your help, Huel! :earth_africa::earth_americas::earth_asia::leafy_green::leafy_green::leafy_green:


#6

What’s bad for the world is overpopulation…


#7

Right on the money!


#8

While I agree, I feel it’s more controversial stating this, even more so doing something about it rather than looking over our food consumption when it comes to dairy or meat.

While I’d personally like to see both issues being adressed I doubt it’s going to happen. One means limit breeding, the other does not limit eating specifically, but limit what we eat of some things.

I could be wrong.


#9

Yeah, absolutely right.

It’s a self destruction machine. Social constructs mean we can’t stop our own demise. We can change our diets and drive electric cars, but that’s not really sufficient. You have 7 billion people. If you change 70 million people’s habits, or let’s say the UK population, you’ve changed the trajectory of a mere 1%.

Who are we to say to emerging markets “Hey guys I know you’re going through your industrial revolution, but you’re going to have to stop it there as it’s changing the planet”. They’re rightfully going to tell us to jog on while also pretending to change how they do things to keep us off their backs.

I know it’s gloomy, it’s bloody terrifying, but we’re fundamentally doomed.

There’s too many of us causing too much damage, it’s the end. I can’t see it lasting longer than another couple of hundred years.


#10

That long?


#11

… Optimism :eyes:


#12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#13

Wow this is a bleak post! But unfortunately I completely agree.

I think one of the reasons there’s so much discord between millenials & younger generation vs the older generation… Cos millenials can plainly see how & why everything’s going to sh1t & the baby boomers etc are still kidding themselves everything’s fine & things can only get better, & if they don’t then oops never mind, not their problem cos they all expect to be dead by the time sh1t really hits the fan!

Love it when you talk gloomy GTI, gets me all riled up :laughing: nothing like contemplating the apocalypse to make you feel alive! :joy::joy:


#14

It is certainly a legitimate concern. I can see two problems with that though:

1 How to define the threshold which separates sustainable population levels from overpopulation.

2 It can be argued that higher population levels mean more brains to move us forward — which, for example, would mean that our trying to limit the population growth (or reducing it) would delay our curing Alzheimer’s, cancer and many other diseases (not to mention our solving the problem of colonising oceans and space, or dealing with overpopulation :wink: ), and thus cause unnecessary deaths and suffering at a very large scale.

Recapitulating, it is a very complex issue, but one thing is sure – having an LCHF/keto Huel would be nice, irrespective of the population levels…


#15

If there were no people we wouldn’t need to worry about them. Without birth there is no suffering.


#16

If I’m going to be absolutely cynical and dark, yet still mature and objective, what you’re saying is by causing further overpopulation, we’ll create a larger population to ensure the existing population live longer, thereby creating further overpopulation?

Honestly man folk don’t like hearing it but it’s scary - Vegan, non vegan, vegetarian, flexitarian, there are too many of us. Too many of us doing too many damaging things.

Hey here’s one for you - Have a little look at how much fuel a commercial airliner goes through then download FlightRadar to your phone. Hover over Heathrow and come back here and talk further about how we’re not doomed…


#17

This is the crux of the matter. The Industrial Revolution was the start of our demise.


#18

Well were everyone to go vegan, we could feed many more than now. Until a point, that we’ll pass eventually, then we’re back to status quo

So I agree with you Phil. Optimally, we’d become fewer. But like you I think we’re doomed, it’s when not if really.


#19

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-47154287


#20

To answer your question – no, that is not what I wrote.

Also, as I have already pointed out (see: 1), before one can have any meaningful conversation on the topic of overpopulation, one has to clearly state how they define overpopulation (and explain why). In your posts (including the last one) you make an implicit assumption that our planet is overpopulated. There are many estimates of the carrying capacity. If memory serves me well, the median is 10^10 (i.e. much higher than the current population size). Most (if not all) such estimates make the ceteris paribus assumption, which means that they do not take technological advancements into account, while in reality, technology increases the carrying capacity (so, as an example, when the population size increases to, let us say, 10^10 in 2050, the carrying capacity may just as well have been increased to 5*10^10). Science and technology aside, these estimates would be much higher if most of the population switched to veganism/vegetarianism (related to limited efficiency of energy transfers between trophic levels).

This whole discussion is utterly OT ;)…