My Vegan Database + A Call for Help
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2020 6:57 pm
Over the last two months I have been creating a public google doc that serves as a database for animal advocates. I would appreciate it if you guys could check it out. However, I need help building a stronger argument for veganism on the subject of nutrition. Even in the face of evidence from health organizations like the WHO, the AND, and other sources I have linked in my google doc, some people still question whether a vegan diet can adequately meet all of human nutrition needs.
The main vegan argument rests on the following two statements:
1. Animals are sentient and capable of suffering.
2. A well-planned vegan diet can meet all of human nutritional needs
If even one of these points is faulty, the entire vegan argument comes crashing down. For the most part, people do not question point #1. Point #2 receives much more criticism. This is why animal advocates should focus on addressing common counter arguments to this point.
COMMON ANTIVEGAN ARGUMENTS:
a. Organizational statements on vegan diets like those from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics(AND) are based in epidemiology and opinions and are therefore not strong science.
b. That antivegan copypasta of organizational statements that recommend against vegan diets for children, pregnant women, and lactating women.
c. We don't know all nutrients that humans need. Therefore, it's best to include animal products in our diet. Otherwise, we risk missing certain unknown nutrients.
d. Supplements bad.
It is important that we address these in an empirical manner. Any research papers or ideas of how to respond to these?
The main vegan argument rests on the following two statements:
1. Animals are sentient and capable of suffering.
2. A well-planned vegan diet can meet all of human nutritional needs
If even one of these points is faulty, the entire vegan argument comes crashing down. For the most part, people do not question point #1. Point #2 receives much more criticism. This is why animal advocates should focus on addressing common counter arguments to this point.
COMMON ANTIVEGAN ARGUMENTS:
a. Organizational statements on vegan diets like those from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics(AND) are based in epidemiology and opinions and are therefore not strong science.
b. That antivegan copypasta of organizational statements that recommend against vegan diets for children, pregnant women, and lactating women.
c. We don't know all nutrients that humans need. Therefore, it's best to include animal products in our diet. Otherwise, we risk missing certain unknown nutrients.
d. Supplements bad.
It is important that we address these in an empirical manner. Any research papers or ideas of how to respond to these?