Well, I had to copy paste. You asked me to provide you with one peer reviewed study which I already did and you didn’t bother going through it. Of course it was favourable to me, I just used it to make my stance. Also, I’d like to hear more about how I’ve “copy pasted most of the stuff” in an article regarding my journey with vegetarianism, which mostly consists of my own experiences. Just so you know, that’s a serious accusation to make.

“And most researchs you’ve sent are 3rd party analysis by independent publishers”

Original research papers and reports are not third party analyses. All of the links I’ve provided except for the first one are direct links to them. And Winston J Craig is a member of the ADA, so that does not make the article a “third party analysis” since he is not someone from outside the group. What diabetic argument did I raise? The American Dietetic Association IS the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the name change happened in 2012. A simple google search would’ve shown you that. Yes, I’ve checked the Wikipedia page. Let me ask you this- how would funding from McDonalds, Mars, ConAgra foods and several other corporations that produce meat products cause a bias towards vegetarianism in any way? Since you mentioned left wing animal activism, the American Dietetic Association is actually considered to be conservative. The association consists of several non vegans/non vegetarians and this is the position of the organization. Even the non vegetarian members who do not particularly endorse a vegetarian diet do not consider consumption of meat as being optimal to healthy living. They only raise their concerns about the scenarios that would arise due to a vegetarian diet that has not been planned well. (Also, it’s the largest organization of food and nutritional professionals in the United States, not the world. I stand corrected)

Instead of comparing the environmental impact of eating chicken, eggs and fish with that of eating beef and calling it negligible, you should be comparing it to my current diet. Since the relative environmental impact of a vegetarian diet is lesser than that of a person who also consumes chicken and fish, it justifies my decision to stay vegetarian from an environmental standpoint since switching back would only cause an increase in the damage I’m doing to the environment.

Looks like you have Earthling Ed’s Ted talk memorized a lot better than me, since I did not mention the phrase “morally superior” anywhere. I stand by what I said, most people only eat meat because they enjoy the taste of it. Around 30% of our country’s population is vegetarian and they’re just as healthy, if not more, than the meat eaters here. It is completely unnecessary and requires you to kill other living beings which rules out eating meat as a personal choice. And yes, if a choice is to be considered personal, the other beings involved in it must give their consent. I don’t see how that’s immature in anyway, yet you’ve dismissed it without giving it a second thought perhaps because you find even the idea of not hurting animals for your personal gain ridiculous. And you know what, vegetarians and vegans are definitely “morally superior” because their actions do not cause pain and suffering as opposed to meat eaters. I consider myself morally superior to you because I’m not taking the lives of sentient beings for my own gain.

Sofware developer with a passion for lending ink to her thoughts and sharing the world inside her head.

Sofware developer with a passion for lending ink to her thoughts and sharing the world inside her head.