I have a simple question. Is an insect considered meat?
that's more of a cooking question, but insectivores are a type of carnivore so I guess technically yes, but like I said "meat" isn't really that well defined as a category. When it comes to crabs and lobsters people say meat, I guess you could say the same about insects. They just tend to be way smaller so it seems weird
>>4927806if theres no cell wall its meat
>>4927806Meat is muscle tissueOffal is organ tissue (unfair to heart and liver desu)bugs are mostly haemolymph and offal. Their muscles are very small. They are borderline anti-nutritious.
>>4927806The original use of the word "meat" included fruit, as in "he ate the meat of the banana." Meat and flesh both can be used to indicate "the edible part of something".So yes, if by "meat" you mean "the edible part" then flies have meat.If by "meat" you mean "muscle tissue", then no.
>>4927806It's meat nutritionally ig. Wouldn't consider it meat considering its taste and method of consumption though.
>>4928166Does this also apply to softshell crabs and the people who sometimes suck the brains out of the crawfish?
>>4929267>>4927821The "you must eat the bugs to save the planet" people have started using the "cool factoid, insects are crustations!" bit to convince people into eating insects.A few pointers -(1) Crustaceans are not insects, but they share a common ancestor. (2) shrimp and crabs appear in the Jurassic but Insects appeared in the Ordovician Period which means Insects appeared around 200 million years before shrimp and crabs.(3) Crustaceans have ten and sometimes twelve legs. Insects all have six legs.As for their dietary qualities -(1) No society of humans in history has ever been pure vegan or insectivore. (2) Some coastal groups have lived on shellfish and crabs almost exclusively.(3) Chitin and calcium-based exoskeletons found on Insects, mollusks, crustaceans etc nutritionally contribute nothing but are easy to remove from Crustaceans/mollusks but practically impossible to remove from insects which are just eaten whole. (4) The protein and fat content of insects IS lower with only a few barely equaling the protein content of mammalian meat.I'm only comparing wet weight with wet weight. Bug eating activists often try comparing the DRIED protein percentage of insects with the WET protein percentage of mammal meat. Which is extremely misleading.https://www.crazycritters.com.au/blogs/blog/live-feeder-insect-comparison?https://tools.myfooddata.com/nutrition-comparison/171447-173634/100g-100gAlso insects have a higher water content than red meats because insects have exoskeletons that prevent them from drying out. Mammals don't have this luxury.Insects can also get away with soft, delicate organs because everything is protected and supported against gravity by the exoskeleton.>>4929261>The original use of the word "meat" included fruitThat's old English. It died out 900 years ago.
>>4929283>That's old English. It died out 900 years ago.not entirely. My parents and grandparents talked about nut meats in reference to the kernel of a nut.US, they are/were boomers and greatest/silent gen for reference.
>>4929284Yep, that's called an analogy, not a literal meaning. Same as saying a "kernel of truth".The "meat of the fruit" is an analogy to the meat from animals. Hell, I say that and I'm not a boomer but I'm definitely not saying it in the literal old English sense.The only source of that old literal meaning that survived the death of old English is in some bible translations and poetry.
>>4929285>Yep, that's called an analogy, not a literal meaning.oxford seems mixedthey record the earliest usage in 1860 but list old english as the etymology.
>>4929287Interesting. I'm no language expert, just giving my 50 cents. Keep in mind that Oxford online isn't even edited by British people anymore. As an institution they are nothing compared to what they were in the 1950's.I'm a 90's child, so like you I got to talk to relatives who were born before WW2.
>>4929285old english current direct descendant is icelandic, and meat just meant food back then, which you can extrapolate as the edible part, as in the food part of the fruit between the rind and the seeds
>>4929316Makes sense.
>>4929283>cool factoid, insects are crustationsI would go the other way. Most crustaceans are bottom feeders and bugs - don't eat them.But you sound like a preachy faggot and as bad as vegans. No one cares about eating your bugs.>It died out 900 years ago.People still say the flesh of fruit, and things like coconut meat.
>>4929756>>cool factoid, insects are crustations>I would go the other way. Most crustaceans are bottom feeders and bugs - don't eat them.>But you sound like a preachy faggot and as bad as vegans. No one cares about eating your bugs.No, I was saying I DISAGREE with that.Please READ.>>4929756>People still say the flesh of fruitNOBODY DOES.NOBODY IN NORMAL CONVERSATION EVER SAYS THAT
>>4927806
>>4929316>direct descendant is icelandicI thought it was low german and/or frisian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N89R99J4OY
>>4927821>When it comes to crabs and lobsters people say meat, I guess you could say the same about insectsWrong. Raw insects have goo inside the shell, while raw crustaceans have solid plump pieces of meat inside the shell. Goo cant qualify as meatThis debunks all arguments that crustaceans are bugs in the culinary sense
>>4929758>I was saying I DISAGREE with that.Yeah, and you are stupid. Any equating of crustaceans to bugs should have people not eat either. Crabs and shrimp are gross trash eaters. Don't eat them.>NOBODY DOESNobody lower class. People with robust lexicons do.
>>4929996>Yeah, and you are stupid. Any equating of crustaceans to bugs should have people not eat either. Crabs and shrimp are gross trash eaters. Don't eat them.That doesn't follow at all you imbecile lol.You literally aren't listening to anything anyone is saying.I WAS SAYING CRUSTACEANS ARE NOT INSECTS. And no, Crabs/Shrimp sold as food don't come from sewage water.>Nobody lower class. People with robust lexicons do.No, You are just making shit up.
>>4929785Neither descended from English but they share a common ancestor.
>>4929283>>4929816Who buckbroke you guys? you're really putting off weird vibes with this kind of childish vitriol. It seems like some topics can't even be mentioned without some autists violently sperging out about it
>>4929283Thank you for your informative post
>>4930091>Said the guy that eats cockroaches because "they are just crustaceans".
>>4929283>The protein and fat content of insects IS lower with only a few barely equaling the protein content of mammalian meat.>I'm only comparing wet weight with wet weight. Bug eating activists often try comparing the DRIED protein percentage of insects with the WET protein percentage of mammal meat. Which is extremely misleading.Is it that misleading when you way the option of eating some protein powder made of insects vs a steak or other kind of "wet" mammal meat? I don't want to spark some autisic new world order discussion with this, I'm just curious
>>4927806insects descend from crustaceans so they're fish
>>4929283Insects aren't crustaceans, they're pancrustaceans. Crustaceans are a paraphyletic group, which means all of the species come from a single ancestor but not all of the descendants are included in the group.This doesn't mean you should eat bugs though.
>>4927806protein
