*please note i deeply value and respect the vegan movement. i am just critical of how humorously it precipitates in online spaces, particularly this one. :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Incogni@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

No, since the claim "veganism does cause intellectual deficiencies" is still wrong, because veganism doesn't cause this, a lack of supplementation does. And most vegans supplement adequately. So saying that veganism "per default" causes this would be dishonest, because it implies that not properly supplementing is the default/intrinsic to veganism, which is not the case.

It's like saying "drinking alcohol kills you" just because you have to be mindful of limiting your consumption and it can kill you if you don't. An extreme statement that contains a kernel of truth, but is simply not correct.

[–] Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Good argument, but it's still admitting that veganism is completely unsuitable for humans in general, due to (and proven by) the need for supplements

[–] Incogni@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

How does this follow in any way? You know that the distinction of "supplement" and "regular part of the diet" is completely arbitrary, right? What's the difference between regular supplementation and the requirement of "having to hydrate" or "eat your greens for your vitamins" to be healthy? It's even less logical/relevant considering many replacement products add B12 etc on their own by now.

Also factory farmed animals are getting B12 fed as a supplement, which makes this argument even weirder. "Pills bad/not part of the diet", but feeding the same pills to pigs and then eating their meat to get the same nutrients is suddenly "ok and natural/good diet"? Doesn't make sense to me.

[–] Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

You just keep telling yourself that, beanboy