Home / L. Attacks on veganism and vegans / Part IND
"Most vegans give up."
difficulty sticking with something says nothing about whether it's morally right. A 2014 Faunalytics survey found that about 84% of vegetarians and vegans abandon the diet, many in the first months. That shows change is hard and support is lacking, not that the change is wrong. Many people also give up trying to quit smoking, and no one concludes smoking is good.
Short answer
It's true that many people give up: a 2014 Faunalytics survey found that about 84% of vegetarians and vegans abandon the diet, many in the first months. The reasons most cited were dissatisfaction with the food, health and social issues, which shows a lack of support and information. But that says change is hard, not that change is wrong. Many people give up trying to quit smoking, and no one concludes smoking is good.
For children
Lots of people try to learn a musical instrument and give up. Does that mean playing music is bad? No! It means it's hard and some people need more help. Veganism is similar: some people give up, but that doesn't change the fact that animals feel.
"If many people give up something hard, does that make it wrong to try?"
Como pode aparecer
"Almost everyone goes back to eating meat."
"Not even you can stick with it."
"I know lots of ex-vegans."
"84% of vegans give up; just accept it."
"Dropout rates show the diet isn't viable."
"I know someone who got sick being vegan." (which is G10)
The strongest version
"Almost everyone goes back to eating meat. Not even you can stick with it."
Strongest version (steelman):
- P1Most people who adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet abandon it.
- P2If so many give up, the diet must be hard, unsatisfying or harmful.
- CSo veganism isn't a realistic or adequate option.
P1 is supported by surveys. P2 has a point: the difficulty is real. The problem lies in the conclusion: how hard it is to keep up a practice doesn't say whether it's right.
The argument is valid as an observation about difficulty. It fails as a moral argument.
Full answer
- a
Reconstruction and diagnosis
The argument confuses difficulty with wrongness:
Fact What it shows What it doesn't show Many give up That keeping up the change is hard That the change is wrong Many give up early That the initial phase is the hardest That the diet is inadequate - b
Where the argument breaks
1. Difficulty isn't wrongness.
Many good practices are hard to keep up, such as quitting smoking or exercising.
2. The reasons point to a lack of support.
In the Faunalytics survey, the main reasons were dissatisfaction with the food (32%), health (26%) and social issues (13%). Many problems could be solved with recipes, planning and community.
3. Many give up early.
About a third of those who gave up kept the diet for three months or less, the hardest phase.
4. Giving up calls for support, not abandoning the question.
If people give up for lack of recipes, planning and company, the answer is to offer those.
5. The moral question doesn't depend on adherence.
Animals still feel, however many people manage to change.
- c
Data and sources
Source What it says Note Faunalytics, study of current and former vegetarians and vegans 84% of vegetarians and vegans give up; 34% within three months; the reasons most cited are dissatisfaction with the food, health and social issues A survey of more than 11,000 adults in the US - d
The strongest counter-reply: giving up signals health problems
The most serious version points out that 26% of those who gave up cited health, and that this may indicate the diet doesn't suit many people.
- e
Why the counter-reply doesn't reach the conclusion
Health problems usually come from lack of planning.
Such as missing B12 or too little energy (G10).
Many had no supervision.
Which calls for more information, not abandonment.
The moral question remains.
Even where there are real difficulties, they justify exceptions, not a general rule (D3).
- f
Back to the moral question
The number of people who give up shows that change is hard, and that those who try deserve support. But it doesn't answer the question about the animals. Those who give up still have the same moral reason that led them to try.
Reasoning errors
Logical
Is the form valid?
Appeal to the crowd
Confusing difficulty with wrongness
Epistemological
Does the evidence support it?
Ignoring the reasons
Biases
Confirmation bias
Remembers the ex-vegans and forgets those who persist
General literature on confirmation bias
Motivated reasoning
Others giving up excuses one's own attempt
General literature on motivated cognition
Extrapolations
The principle being tested is: "if most people give something up, it's wrong".
If it applied to…Quitting smokingTap to see
It would be wrong, because many relapse
No one concludes this
If it applied to…Weight-loss dietsTap to see
They'd be wrong, because many give up
No one concludes this
If it applied to…Regular exerciseTap to see
It would be wrong, because many stop
No one concludes this
Contradictions
Such as quitting smoking.
Study, sport, work.
Which calls for help, not abandonment.
What the argument gets right
What is true
The high dropout rate is real, and it says something important: change is hard, and many people don't get the support they need. Animal advocates should take this seriously, offering recipes, nutrition information and a welcoming community.
But
But the difficulty doesn't change the moral question. Animals still feel, and everyone who tries, even if they stumble, is already answering that question.
Connections
Usually comes before
Usually comes after