dec wrote:

> "DappleAndWasser" > wrote in message om...
>
>>In as much as we evolved from omnivores, and in as much as all souls
>>are eternal (so killing animals is not an ethical problem), I see no
>>reason to be vegan, other than to reduce one's sexual lust.
>
>
> Environmental impact--each successive trophic level in the
> food chain is approximately an order of magnitude more
> destructive than the one below it, but some are several
> orders of magnitude more destructive.

What a big steaming load of crap! You've written
dogma, not science.

Yesterday on a golf course, I saw the head of a
squirrel, the only remains of a meal for a hawk or owl.
I invite you to "prove" how hawks are *any* more
environmentally destructive than squirrels, LET ALONE
"orders of magnitude" (pshaw - you don't even know what
that means) more destructive.

In fact, with the exception of man, the higher up the
trophic levels you go, the LESS destructive species
appear to be.

>
>
>>By being a vegan, you miss out on the best proteins (whey) and the
>>best fats (fish oil).
>
>
> One can put together a completely plant-based meal
> with an EAA profile similar to whey.

Feel free.

>
> One can also buy algae-based DHA sources. Ari Simopoulos
> reports that wild purslane, a terrestial plant, is a source
> of EPA. Also, we will have soon have precursors to DHA
> and EPA that convert more easily than ALA in our
> vegetable oils in the supermarket.
>
>
>