That study is of the environmental impact of meat farming, it doesn’t study the environmental impact of highly engineered vegan protein replacement products. The impact of those is unknown, but judging by the inputs required, they’re going to be far more intensive than a carrot or some dried legumes, which is my point — we cannot assume that all vegan products are inherently environmentally friendly.

However, we can assume that a vegan diet is better than eating meat every day. It’s all about balance again.

As more and more technological formulation is piled into vegan product development by ‘Big Food’, there are yet to be any studies of their impact — note that many of these products rely on farming systems that are fuelling biodiversity loss. Hence that’s why my focus is on improved standards, and overall balance amongst the multiple factors that make a healthy world.

I like one of the closing comments from your link “My personal opinion is we should interpret these results not as the need to become vegan overnight, but rather to moderate our [meat] consumption.”, which ehoes my position precisely.

The problem with food issues is that many people seem to think one cause and big changes are the answer, yet it’s big changes and the predominance of single issues which have got us exactly where we are now.

It’s been good to talk with you, I respect your opinion to be vegan and my intention is not persuade you otherwise, but to talk about the haziness of food choices that lays in between the polarised opinion.