Yes, we also need to address fossil fuel usage... I already made that point in my previous reply. But it's not 'either, or'. We can and should be doing both.

I've also addressed the argument about crop deaths elsewhere - I find it tragically comic that, when faced with the prospect of going vegan, people who wouldn't normally give a second thought about the welfare of mice and rats suddenly seem so concerned about them that they'd rather have cows deliberately killed in their billions than risk the accidental deaths of a vague and unknown number of mice and rats.

As for the health benefits of 'mock meats', while they may not be the healthiest option (plant-based whole foods are MUCH more healthy) they still, on balance, seem to be healthier than animal flesh, which is a significant cause of the current cancer and obesity epidemics.

Of course, there is lab-grown meat - more investment and rapid development could make this widely available and affordable for most people, if the will was there. Personally, I wouldn't eat it but it would unquestionably be a better option for the cows/pigs/chickens/sheep and for the planet (and therefore all of us).

I believe people should be able to eat what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else - if they want to eat lab grown meat or vegan 'mock meats', despite the health risk - that's their business, as long as they're not killing sentient beings to do it or making the planet on which we all live uninhabitable.

And if the health concerns you raised are really an issue for people, then I guess most of those people will already be on a whole food, plant-based diet (provably the healthiest diet on the planet) and the issue is moot.

But, sadly, your reply seems only to support the original point I was making in my article - people would rather die giving excuses for why they didn't make the necessary lifestyle changes, than save themselves by doing the right thing.