maxmalrichtig

Just as a sort of PSA: You will get no omega acids from WHOLE flax seeds. You need to ground them up first! This should be done shortly before consuming as the ALA in the seeds tends to oxidize when exposed to air.

I'm super late to the party and I hope everything is going well on your side.

I'm not a parent, but I find the info at PCRM generally helpful and mostly fact based.

They also have a little section about plant based diets and pregnancy: https://www.pcrm.org/good-nutrition/plant-based-diets/pregnancy

All the best!

it’s harder to fight evolution and it takes time

See, I don't really understand why you think we would need any evolution for this. For what it's worth, we are already very well capable of thriving on a plant-exclusive diet with our current genetic setup.

meat free lifestyles would most likely push different evolutionary traits in a few million years

Most probably not - or at least not to great extent. You need a selection pressure for evolution to happen. I.e. you need natural selection. And since our food-choices influence our chances for reproduction very little in our modern days. Humans removed them selves to a great extent form "evolution by natural selection" anyways in our age.

you have to consider cultural influences as well

Cultural influences can be used as an explanation for a status quo, but are a bad justification for future behavior most of the time.

Additionally, veganism is more prominent in higher income countries because of food processing and “health food” taxes cost money, so many vegan items aren’t inexspensive.

I can not agree with you on that statement in any way. The cheapest staple foods you could get are mostly vegan (Grains, Legumes, Dried goods, seeds, vegies, fruit, potatos). Meat and animal products are quite expensive to produce in comparison. Most of the time this just does not seem like it, because animal ag is extremly subsidized to keep this industry economically viable. If anyone would need to pay the FULL price of animal products, most of us would not be able to afford then on a regular basis.

Those people that are too impoverished to afford a full vegan diet would starve without meat.

Completely backwards. "Poorer" regions that have a climate suited to produce crops often have traditionally a very plant heavy diet, since things like grains and legumes have a great shelf life and are very cheap. Meat is fucking expensive. It boils down to basic thermodynamics. You need to put so much calories into an animal that you will never be ably to retrieve by consuming their body. It is wasteful.

Also consider those places where the land can’t be fertilized and farmed. Those people as well would starve.

No one in their right minds would say that some indigenous tribes or the Inuit need to be eating veggie burgers tomorrow. We are talking about the vast majority of people on this planet - like you and me. And we have the choice. Diverting the argument over to some hypothetical about foreign tribes or poor people is not necessary and also not at the heart of the arguments.

PS:

I forgot an important note on the "morality" point.

It might not always be obvious to non-vegans, but Veganism is not a diet. It actually is a moral compass. To make this more clear, let me copy you some of the "definition of veganism":

"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; [...]"

That is veganism. Nothing more, nothing less. The things we collectively do as vegans are just consequences of internalizing this philosophy and acting according to it.

That's why the topic of "morality" often comes up in discussion with vegans, but for an outsider going that route might sound a little far-fetched. But it actually isn't - it is at the core of our actions.

Just wanted to put that out there.

Sorry for the late reply...

Grains are pretty high in protein content. However, oils (e.g. fried foods), sweets and fruits and often pretty low in protein. If you are eating a "what ever I crave" vegan diet with processed foods mixed in, you will easily land below that threshold.

For example, my wife tracks her food sometimes (for a couple weeks each) and she often lands below her recommended target. She is not eating badly but also not suuuper clean and still, she often does not reach her recommended protein amount.

Bottom line is: You can easily be eating "not enough" protein. However, most of the time it will not lead to big problems. But in the long run, this might get problematic. Every person - vegan or not - has to plan their diets well and think about what they eat at least a little. "Being vegan" is not a magic wand of nutrition. We still need to consider what we eat every day.

Either you bring a coherent argument or you stop trolling. But these childish responses are boring af.

To all the people downvoting this:

Vegan here. I got all of these responses multiple times online and in face-2-face discussions. And believe me when I say, people where mostly serious when they put out these statements.

The clowns on the right kind of describes my inner WTF response quite accurately though. 🤷

i didn’t mean to imply you’re an asshole

Don't worry. I wasn't lead to believe that. Quite the contrary: You sounded like a sensible person one can reason with. That's why I took the time to reply in greater depth, so you (and maybe others) understand our viewpoints a little better. :)

i think your response is sensible

Thank you for the kind words!

I would like to give you the chance to see it from our perspective:

If you would see something fundamentally wrong in the streets/online, wouldn't you speak up about it?

Like for example, someone boasts online that they steal from a local family business every day and on their way out, they punch the owners kid in the face. And others are even rooting for that person in the comment section. - You would still speak up about it, wouldn't you? You would try to set that person straight.

As vegans, we came to the conclusion that using and exploiting animals is a wrong thing to do. We've seen too many horrible things while experiencing the gentleness and kindness of these animals. We have sworn ourselfs to change our ways to not be part of that anymore and we try to fight for them - as they are not able to do it on their own. We speak up about the injustice that we perceive - just as you would do in the other instance.

We know that we are annoying because of that, annoying because we speak up. The people that try to break the echo chamber are always considered annoying. But we can't help it. We need to do something at least.

It is. But in the mind of these people, this is a valid concern and we need to be able to lead them away from this mindset. We have to guide them to new insights, not fight them over it. (Not that I would imply that YOU were trying to fight.)

It was not the first time I got that response. I genuinely don't know where people get this from?!

it’s important to not mock those ridiculous questions

Totally! It might be the first time a person gets to think about the matter in a deeper way. It is normal for them to be all over the place.

I think my answer at that time was something along the lines of:

It's true that these wild animals need to do that. But you are not a wild animal. You are an intelligent human, that has anything they could ever think of in the supermarket right around the corner. While a lion might not have another choice in order to survive, we as humans are not not in the same position. We can choose to eat something different while still enjoying our food and live a happy healthy life. So would it still be right for us to kill other sentient beings, if we are not forced to do so?

I normally think of my discussion partners as intelligent people that are able to reason. I won't let them off the hook easily, but there is no reason to "fight" with them as this will improve exactly nothing.

Eating meat is considered [...] as an evolutionary trait

Correct. But these early humans had no supermarkets or global trade systems. We (and our food selection process) has very little to do with the constraints that these previous generations had. Your argument basically boils down to "it is natural for us to eat meat. This is called "appeal to nature" and is a logical fallacy (i.e. not a very good argument).

cattle industries have gone too far

Kudos to you for acknowledging that.

meat is still one of the easiest ways to give yourself the nutrients required

I do not agree, as meat is lacking in some of the essential nutrients or has a suboptimal composition of them. But even if it was the best source, that would not necessarily justify everything we do (i.e. harm other sentient beings) to get it. To give you an (over the top) counter example: Human meat would even be much better in terms of it's nutrient composition - but no one would argue for canibalism because of that fact.