[cgh]

The article is about cricket flour, not eating whole crickets. Cricket flour products are already on sale in hundreds of stores. The key is to mass produce the flour as right now it's quite expensive. That's what's specifically addressed in the article, not the issue of convincing people to eat it in the first place.

[notahacker]

Whether the challenge of mass producing cricket flour is actually worth solving of course, depends on demand for the product extending beyond novelty value, which is part of the problem with edible algae, also widely available in stores and rather simpler to produce and yet far from being a mainstream foodstuff.

As far as I'm aware use of cricket flour is also virtually nonexistent amongst the many cultures that consider whole insects a delicacy.

On the basis of both of the above I'd hazard that cricket flour is unlikely to become a significant staple food even if niche businesses perfect the art of cricket-farming.

[robbrown451]

It has the "ick" factor regardless of whether ground up or not. And the article does talk about flavor, etc.

[7952]

I understand that Cricket Powder contains protein and other nutrients. But is it more efficient than just using plants as a source of those things? Surely the choice is not steak vs crickets but crickets vs soya?

[cgh]

Plant protein is subpar because of its amino acid profiles. I'm not being anti-vegetarian here, it's the basic truth and it's why strength athletes etc. don't count plants as significant sources of protein.

Basically, bugs are better, comparable to any other animal source.