Below are several of the more interesting messages from the VEGAN Mailing list. Because the list is private, we have removed all email headers.
On the radio, I heard an interesting story. A man walks up to a little boy on the beach throwing star fish back into the ocean. The man said that there were millions of starfish and there was no way that he could save them all. The boy went back to throwing the star fish back into the ocean. The man said that it really would not make a difference. As the boy was throwing one back he said that it made a difference to this one.
We may not be able to save the 45 billion animals killed each year throughout the world but we can save one at a time. It will make a difference to each of them.
It was not me that said every six hours. Actually it is about 5,137,000 animals killed every hour throughout the world. That means that it takes slightly over one hour to equal the numbers of innocent Jews that were killed in the Jewish Holocaust. Would you believe that there has been about 2,500,000,000,000 animals killed through the world since the end of WWII. It is hard to give an exact number even though it is about 45 billion animals killed each year now. I do not know how many in the previous years. So, 2.5 trillion animals killed for food and experimentation since WWII is an educated guess. That is a little less then a half million times as many Jews that were killed in the Jewish Holocaust.
I strongly agree with your last two paragraphs which is copied below. This is in no way diminishing the horror of the Jewish Holocaust. It is just putting the Animal Holocaust in proper prespective.
Doc Odessa, Texas
Fran wrote in part:
> THE HOLOCAUSTS:
> As Doc pointed out, the number of people killed in Nazi Germany is the same
> as the number of animals killed EVERY SIX HOURS for human consumption. Can
> someone please do the math and come up with a ballpark statistic on the
> number of animals slaughtered for food and fur just since the end of World
> War II and the infinitesimal percentage seven million would be of that
> number? It would be blatantly speciesist to compare the magnitude of the
> two and still conclude that the Hitler's holocaust is worse than the one
> that continues unabated.
> I fervently believe that on the grand scale of things, the subjugation of
> animals by humans is by far, by far, the greatest wrong that has ever
> occurred on this Earth, unparalleled in its magnitude and the utter apathy
> surrounding it.
> Why is wrong only wrong when the victims walk on two legs?
I personally think the animal holocaust is analogous to the Jewish one. I think it's a valid comparison. If it's offensive, maybe it's offensive to you because anything about the Jewish holocaust is offensive to you? That's very understandable.
Remember, animals get rounded up into cages (concentration camps) where they are tortured, sometimes starved (in the case of laying hens) and eventually get slaughtered. "Holocaust" is a word that can therefore apply to their situation as well as the Jews. And it doesn't take anything away from the Jewish holocaust. I would frankly hope that anyone who feels so deeply about the Jewish holocaust would be in a unique position to understand that what people are doing to "food animals" is wrong.
Hannibal, First off, it would be ridiculous to compare someone who is vegan to someone who is either racist or sexist because they are completely different things. A racist is someone who believes one race is superior to another and the same for a sexist with one sex being superior over another. Veganism, on the hand, has nothing to do with one race/sex or animal being superior over anything. Veganism teaches equality of animals and understanding. So therefore, the flesh-eaters are the "racists"/"sexist" in the vegan world because they believe that humans are superior kings of the animal "kingdom" and can abuse their power by enslaving and eating fellow animals, making them inferior. Veganism has taught me love and compassion. That also goes with the human animal (although it is hard sometimes), we must learn to love and be compassionate towards all beings. Plus, in correspondence with what everyone else has mentioned, it is very important to spread the word of veganism and yes that means to flesh-eaters. That is why it is "ok" or acceptable to have nonvegan friends in your life because you are doing good for yourself and veganism in the process. I hope that answered your question!
..:: L y d i a ::..
Hello. I just joined this mailing list, and this will be my first post here. I would like to comment on Doc's remark that "we are winning".
Whether or not we are winning depends on how you look at it. We are clearly winning in the sense that the numbers of vegetarians and the number of vegans is steadily increasing. Unfortunately, the numbers of animals that die in slaughterhouses is also steadily increasing. For example, between the years 2000 and 2001, the numbers of mammals and birds killed in the U.S. for food increased from 9.4 billion to 9.8 billion. This increase is largely due to increasing consumption of chicken.
In part because of health concerns, which animal rights activists have had a role in making people aware of, people are switching from eating cows and pigs to instead eating chicken, which they perceive as being less damaging to their health. However, since chickens are much smaller animals than cows, many more animals end up dying per meal, which accounts for the continuing dramatic increase in the numbers of animals slaughtered.
In my opinion, those of us who are vegan for ethical reasons are making a terrible mistake when we emphasize health as the primary reason for being a vegetarian. I believe that it just reinforces people's attitude that animals are unimportant, and it allows the public to dismiss vegetarians and vegans as just a bunch of health freaks, as opposed viewing us as people who are genuinely questioning the ethical foundations of the way in which our society treats animals.
If it is our society's attitude towards animals which we are seeking to change, then I believe that emphasizing a message which says that vegetarianism is no more important than getting proper exercise takes us in the wrong direction.
>Every month there is more bad news for the flesh industry.
>Today on CBS they talked about the lack of inspections with
>the USDA for ground beef. The courts have kept companies
>from being closed down by the government. Therefore a lot
>of the flesh that our flesh eating friends are eating is
>contaminated with salmonella poisoning. Every time that a
>report like this is on a national news media, it gets people
>thinking. More and more people are cutting way back on the
>eating of flesh and some of those have moved into
>vegetarianism. I believe that a vegetarian is a vegan
>waiting to happen.
>I believe that we are well on our way to becoming a
>predominately vegan world by 2050. I will not be around
>then since I would have to be 109, but at least I can enjoy
>seeing that it is progressing in that direction.
Hi everybody. I just wanted to say that this year one of my resolutions was to try to encourage people to switch to vegetarianism/veganism and be more helpful to those that are on the path. Anyhow, the girl I'm dating has switched (she was vegetarian before), and has convinced 2 of her friends to try it as well. Also, the other day a friend I've been working on for years who used to tell me "I will never stop eating meat." told me he was going to try vegetarianism and hopefully convert to veganism. That was after I sent him the article by Dawkins that somebody posted that hints at him being vegan and atheist. My friend is a biology teacher and Dawkins is one of his heroes. Thanks to whoever sent that :) Also, several of my students have confided in me that they are going to try vegetarianism/veganism and I've been trying to lend support and encouragement. Everyone so far has said that it's been pretty easy. Anyhow, I think there certainly is an interest out there and since it's much easier now than ever, people are willing to give it a shot. Maybe I just never noticed it as much before because It wasn't my main focus. Something to think about.
Rick Fullerton, Ca
I don't know what's considered the "normal" range for B12 in ones bloodstream. However, EVERY VEGAN NEEDS to supplement B12. There are some people that would deny that, but it's the truth. There are many research reports proving that statement. If there's one thing vegans need to supplement, it's B12. Please buy some vitamin B12 supplements. If you can't get them in Croatia, you can purchase them online I'm sure.
I personally take a multivitamin everyday which includes B12. Plus every 2 weeks I take a special B12 vitamin with 10000% US RDA of B12. Since B12 can be "stored" in the body for long periods of time, it's possible you can get by just taking one of those 10000% US RDA vitamin B12 supplements once a month and be okay. But because B12 absorption varies from person to person, it makes sense to supplement it more often. You should also use two different brands of vitamin B12 vitamins, because one brand may not be as good as the other.
You can NOT get adequate supplies of B12 in your food. Even if you eat special kinds of foods which are supposedly high in B12, please don't rely on it. Just take a vitamin supplement and you never have to guess at it.
Anyway, now that we've covered that issue... Many anti-vegans will say that because vegans need to supplement B12, veganism must therefore be "unnatural" and therefore "wrong". The truth is that recent studies have concluded that vegans are far better off in all vitamins except perhaps B12 and D compared with meat and dairy eaters. It turns out that typical meat eaters need to supplement A LOT more than vegans do. They need B12 almost as bad as vegans do. But they also need to supplement A & C as well as a bunch of other vitamins and minerals (especially Calcium). So it would seem if you condemn veganism for being "unnatural", you would have to condemn meat eating even moreso. Don't be intimidated by supplements being "unnatural".
One other thing to consider is that it used to be that humans spent most of their days outside in the sunlight. And humans didn't used to wash their vegetables. Nowadays we stay indoors all day long, hardly ever letting the sun touch our skins. That means that we now need to supplement vitamin D, because vitamin D is supposed to be produced in the human body as a result of exposure to sunlight. Also, washing our vegetables will wash away the vitamin B12 that's on the surface of vegetables. Vitamin B12 is produced by a bacteria, and if you wash the vegetables, you lose the B12. If we lived back in ancient times, vitamin B12 and D wouldn't be an issue for vegans. But meat eaters would still have the problems they currently have. In my opinion, therefore, meat eating is "unnatural" by comparison to veganism.
You raised a very interesting subject about the durability of leather versus the right of a cow not to be robbed of its skin. Yes, leather is a very durable material, but the truth is that every leather coat, purse, shoe, chair and car interior you see is literally the "skin off the back" of animals who were brutally slaughtered after enduring miserable lives. Every time I see a leather purse, I have a mental image of a cow chained by one leg on her trip through the slaughterhouse. I'm ashamed to say that I have a big box in the guest room closet of leather purses, shoes, even a leather skirt and matching jacket I used to wear back in the days when I let others do my thinking for me.
I understand your father's point about the wastefulness of having to replace leather imitations. However, it depends what you buy. If you buy a pair of cheap plastic shoes or a purse, they won't last, let alone be comfortable. However, there are many grades of imitation leather to be found, and the better ones are virtually indistinguishable from the real thing. If non-leather furniture falls apart, it isn't necessarily the fabric that is the cause. It could be just poor construction, like so many things these days.
The environmental impact angle can be countered with the argument that raising cattle requires immense amounts of grain that could better be used to feed hungry people, hundreds of millions of gallons of water, burning of rainforests to provide grazing land, and the inevitable pollution problems that go along with factory farming.
But to me, the bottom line is still that the ends don't justify the means. I can't rationalize that a desire for durable furniture gives us the right to kill.
Hope you're feeling better.
Exercising & Veganism
XXXXXX has written several times in the past about the benefits of exercising along with a vegan diet. Well, I have something to add to that which will help all but especially for the older subscribers. As you get older your body starts to fall apart. I am getting close to 61 and I look much younger then most of those around my age. I also have much less health problems but I do have some. I have arthritis, skin cancer from sunburns as a child, and a serious back problem. My mother broke my back with a 2x4 when I was around 15 and three of my vertebra's welded together (she would not take me to the hospital and forced me to go to school with my broken back. I found out how bad it was when I was in the service. Anyway, I am getting off the subject. That put a strain on my lower back. I have had problems with my back every since she broke my upper back. About 13 years ago it really started getting very bad with so much pain that I could not even get out of a chair or lift anything over about five pounds. It would take several days to get to the point where I could be back to my normal. Then about nine years ago I was lifting a TV over something and I heard a loud snap and felt pain but I was able to walk. Later that day when I was trying to get up from the toilet, I had the worse back pain that I ever had in my back. It took me about an hour to stand up. During that time I mainly just sat there in pain. I just could not stand up. Then it took me about an hour and a half to get to the telephone to call my ex-wife so she could come over to help me. She had to pull up my shorts and trousers. Now you talk about something embarrassing...that was it. Gee, the list now knows my most embarrassing moment. Anyway I went to bed and the next morning my ex-wife drove me to the hospital. I spent five days there and I forced them to release me because they wanted to keep me their longer.
I went through a ton of tests and it was all heading towards surgery. Consumer Reports, several medical newsletters that I was subscribing to, magazine articles, and other sources stated that surgery should only be done in severe cases. After my MRI, I was waiting to see the surgeon and talked to a man with some kind of small machine strapped on his back that creates an electrical shock that kills the pain. In the process of talking to him I found out that he had several surgeries on his back. He said that every time it just gets worse. I ask him why he keeps going for more surgeries and he said that it will have to get better soon. By this time I was ready to drive back from Dallas to Midland and not even see the surgeon. About that time they called me into the office. I could not believe what I saw. The doctor was a young black doctor that looked about 15 years old. I thought that no one that looked that young could be any good. Well, he went through the same degree of motion procedures that the other doctors went through. After looking at the X-rays, CAT scan, MRI, and his exam, here is what he told me: He said that it was bad and told me why, and then told me the same thing that the magazines, newsletters, and articles stated. He sent me to what I originally requested... physical therapy. After going through the complete series of treatments and educational classes, I was told that I had to do the exercises everyday for the rest of my life. I have, and yes, they work.
Then came this horrible flu about a week ago. I had spent most of the week in bed except when I approved posts and had to use the bathroom. I had just reached the turning point and was starting to feel better. I was ready to resume exercising which I stopped temporally when I get the flu. Anyway, I pulled my back again by doing something stupid that normally would not have caused a problem. I sat down and could not get out of my chair for about an hour and a half. Back to bed! Today I went back to work and my motel in Midland and thought I was going to die. With the flu still not completely over, but on the mend, and with my damaged back, I was really hurting. All the sleep, the stopping of the exercising, and the stretching is what I believe did it this time.
The good news is that about 36 hours after the pulling of my lower back, thanks to nine years of building up my back muscles, I am getting better. Oh yes, it still is not anywhere back to normal but I think it will be by Friday night. So, to sum up a long story, beside a good vegan diet, exercise is very valuable especially for us senior citizens. No matter if you are a vegan for AR reasons, health, or for the environment, we all help our cause by being in great health. Exercise is part of that along with a good vegan diet.
Sorry for the long post but my problem may help others live a better healthier life. You are never to old, or young, to start exercising and eating a good vegan diet.
Doc Odessa, Texas
I can speak from the field of cognitive science. There is a subset of this field that deals with animals, but not nearly all of it. Cognitive Science is really an umbrella term, including as it does linguistics, neuroscience, philosophy, brain science, cognitive psychology, education, etc. At my school (The University of Arizona), there is one professor in psychology involved in primate research (he's the main target of the animal rights group here). And there are a few involved in rat research (neuroscience). However, you can do some pretty cool stuff just on humans (the really cool stuff in my opinion). There are people doing fMRI, ERP, and reaction time experiments (among other methodologies) with humans.
What you probably WILL have to watch in most cognitive science / cognitive psychology graduate programs that have professors doing animal research... is your mouth. Unfortunately, animal research can bring a lot of money to programs. This is just politics. Professors can really screw you over in graduate school, in ways that they can't when you're an undergraduate.
But really, most cognitive science programs deal just with humans. Animal learning is certainly interesting, but human learning is the real mystery.
As for the fields of biology or genetics, I have no idea how much animal research is done. I'd imagine it's a LOT.
Feel free to email me off-list if you have more questions.
>I've been racking my brain over this one for some time. I hope some on the
>list will have some wisdom to share with me.
>I'm currently an undergrad studying computer science, and I've been
>thinking lately about what I want to do afterwards. I'm leaning toward
>grad school, in some other field. I've been reading some Richard Dawkins
>lately (_River out of Eden_ and currently _A Selfish Gene_) and I am
>fascinated by his works. Evolutionary biology, genetics, and cognitive
>science are some fields I'm interested in persuing.
>So my question is to anyone who has had experience in any science that
>involves, or tends to involve the use of animals. Can I dive into some
>field such as biology or genetics while being assured that I will be able
>to avoid the use of animals?
>Note that I'm mainly interested in the theoretical subsets of such fields,
>but I can imagine problems early on, while covering the fundamentals.
>"As long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed,
>he who sows the seeds of murder and pain cannot reap the joy of love."
> -- Pythagoras
Definitions are notoriously controversial. I am not comfortable with veganism being considered "like a religion" because I see an important difference between religion and ethics. Ethics are subject to revision whenever new information is encountered, whereas religious views hold fast to dogma even if new information challenges them. Ethics, like all philosophy, seeks truth; it welcomes and fairly, objectively considers information from all sources (ideally). Religions limit their acceptable sources (e.g. the Bible) and become defensive when challenged.
I agree that many vegans resemble religious adherents rather than philosophers. I find I have little in common with them beyond surface resemblance of diet and concern for animals.
I base my morality upon utilitarianism. Put simply, I endeavor to maximize good (i.e. happiness and pleasure). This involves reducing suffering, but gets very complex when analyzed.
As for the quest for perfect veganism, I ask: to what end? If the goal is reducing suffering, as opposed to some personal or religious quest for purity, I recommend against going too far with purity of veganism.
Everyone should understand the "Law of Diminishing Returns," as it applies to veganism: after a point, efforts to become more and more vegan become harder and harder and consequently yield less and less benefit to the animals for the effort. Other efforts, such as outreach to convert more people to veg*nism, will accomplish more.
Also being too different from the general public makes one appear radical. People will think we demand too much--that agreeing with us requires too much. They will tune us out. People are more disposed to listen to others whom they perceive to be similar to themselves. Be careful of setting the bar too high.
I just read an article in the e magazine that says that most americans, especially vegans, are iodine deficeint. Anyone know anything about this? thankfully the most potent source of iodine is seaweed. Yuck, but I guess I will try to eat it sometimes. Sea vegetables seem to be an improtant part of what people are supposed to eat for health, but EWWWWWW! i cant stand the taste! Maybe we all evolved living in groups around the ocean or something and so became dependent on what was in it. I just sure wish there was another source of iodine besides fish, seaweeds, and iodized salt.
So, now on my list of things to eat more of are :iodine, b-12, essential fatty acids, water, sunlight for vit D, and Chromium (black pepper???, and exercise
Anyway does this sound right to everyone or am I trying too hard?( i mean, a list of things I should be trying to get that americans usually dont get.)
PS One sucess of my veganism - when I was lacto ovo I had a very pale face. Well, it is still pale unfortunately, BUT being vegan has caused me to have naturally pink cheeks, and a healthier look to my skin, so that now I feel ok about myself without any makeup on. That used to not be the case.
PPSS Bob - while I have to admit, I have most likely been obsessed with exercise for the wrong reasons, I am happy about it for a few things. No, it has not made a miracle out of my body like I wanted it to, which is disappointing - but even if my shape is not changing how I want it to, I do have an interesting success to report: I am getting STRONG! when I first started, I could barely do 10 pushups on my knees (heard it was better for women's backs this way, center of balance or something) and I was panting, and my back was all saggy ( i dont even know if I really made it to ten). Now, I can do 30 PUSHUPS on my knees, no saggy back at all, and then after a 5- 10 minute rest I can do ANOTHER 30! WOW! that is so much stronger! Once I even did 50 push up "crunches" (really fast half pushups)I can see a bicep now too. Also, when I started running(running and fast walking) I could go for about 10 minutes and then pooped out completely, now I can go for 30 minutes and I still feel fine afterwards. My heart no longer hurts when I exercise, I feel more "able" during my regular life, and I no longer pant and feel dizzy after climbing one set of measely little stairs. Feeling strong is a nice feeling.
> Does anyone know of any research proving vegans live longer?
A couple of recent posts mention we vegans can expect to live longer. I believe this, and I frequently tell people it, but I cannot quote any studies if I am ever challenged.
I do know veg*n diets are associated with reduced risk of cancer and heart disease. Since they are the 2 biggest killers, it is reasonable to hypothesize vegans live longer, but that is all. Perhaps vegans have higher death rates from other causes. A good study would compare vegan and non-vegan longevity and control for other factors such as exercise, medical access, etc. So does anyone know of any such studies?
Just FYI: absolute proof is impossible, since it would require randomly assigning groups of people to vegan and non-vegan diets then waiting until they all die and evaluating whether the average longevities are significantly different. This, btw, is why tobacco companies could say there was no proof smoking caused cancer. No studies randomly assigned people to smoke or not. The tobacco execs clingged to the straw that maybe some unknown genetic factor both inclined people to smoke, and caused cancer.
Mateus from Portugal wrote:
Probably I wrote something about Portugal, but now I can certainly write something more.
I cannot say exactly how many vegetarians or vegans we have, but I can assure you the number is growing fast. I was able to identify 35 restaurants that serve vegan food, and I know of some more that are going to open soon.
There are (at least) two universities with vegetarian (not vegan) canteens: one in Lisbon and the other in Coimbra.
There are two mailing lists in Portuguese about veganism. One has 107 members, and the other has 70 right now. This is not much, but please remember that not everyone can access the internet here in Portugal. Three years ago, when one of these lists begun, it simply had no members, I think, and was kept in "stand by" for an year or so.
Finally, me and a group of friends have put up an website with information in Portuguese, and in in 3 months we had 6460 visits. 75 users registered to receive information by email (we send a newsletter regularly). And, what I think is interesting to analyze: * 25 of these registered users are vegetarian; * 30 of them still eat fish or meat. On my view this is not bad. It shows that there are many people waking up to the question, and that's good. :-)
You want to look into Agave nectar. It tastes a lot like honey, it's so close. Recently Amy's started replacing the honey in their products with it. I use it all the time in stir-fry's and such. It's packed with energy, too. I feel very energetic after eating something with agave nectar in it. Anyway, you can buy agave nectar at health food stores. I know Whole Foods has it. Check near the sugars, honey, or maple syrup section.
You can also try maple syrup. Or high fructose corn syrup. Or simply dissolve sugar in water.
For oatmeal, I just use sugar. But the agave nectar would give it a nice kick.
I *wish* we had a "vegan" symbol. That would be cool. I don't know of anyone pressing it, though. Many health food makers are now labeling their products "Vegan", but not the mainstream food makers. At one point there was a rumor going around that the next generation of appliances would be hooked up to the internet. Your microwave would have a bar code reader. You'd just wave your box across the bar code scanner, and it would determine the proper settings with which to cook your food. It would also alert you if it found any ingredients in the food which you were allergic to. And there was a rumor that they would also be able to tell you if it was vegan, vegetarian, kosher, whatever. I'd assume they'd have them at grocer
It is obvious that you put a lot of time and care in moderating this list. I'm sure I'm not the only one who realizes what a quality list this is, both in form and content. So many Internet lists are just people letting off steam about a subject by using maximum vulgarity and minimum critical thinking. Unfortunately, this reflects much of what passes for communication in our society.
I look forward to reading the day's posts to this list because I know I am going to encounter thought-provoking discussions with respectful dialogue between people as well as helpful and interesting information on all aspects of vegan living.
I agree with you on what constitutes happiness. It is, indeed, different things for different people. Obviously, there are many people who seek happiness through accumulation of material wealth. Many of them probably consider themselves happy. But I think if we look at examples of the people who left the greatest impact on the world, we will find that they were the ones who derived happiness through giving of themselves, spiritually as well as financially.
I have already advised my kids not to anticipate receiving an inheritance from me someday. Everything I save is going to animal rights organizations and shelters. They are two strong, smart young women who can make anything of their lives that they want to. Not so for the animals, who remain without legal protection from the cruelty and greed of humans.
I have asked my family again this year, please, please, no more sweaters, no more bubble bath, no more ceramic birds to sit on the shelf with the others; just make a donation to the animal shelter of your choice. I wish some year they'd listen!
A moral person includes all beings in his circle of compassion.
In the 50's women knew their place. They would not be doctors but rather nurses. They would not be lawyers but rather secretaries. They would not be truck drivers but rather "house wives". Women knew their place in the home also. The man made the decisions and the women obeyed.
The same for blacks. Back then we called them "Negroes" and sometime something similar. They cleaned our bathrooms, cooked our food, shined our shoes, and generally did what whites did not want to do. In the South they even had their own rest rooms (one for men and women) while we had clean ones for men and a second one for women. They had one tap water facets while we had ice cold water. They sat in the back of the bus while we sat in the front. If they thought that was unfair then the KKK or similar groups would just hang them. That stopped the criticism. We lived in harmony.
Religions other then Christians were mistreated for the greater good of a society that lived in harmony. Oh that was the good old days. Or was it? NO! Give me the good present days any day. Oh we had civility and respect but look at the price. We can still progress farther then we are at today but let us not fool ourselves about yesterday. They were not the good old days for women and minorities. I will happily give up some of those so called freedoms since they took away freedoms for others. I want a level freedom base for all. Something to think about.
Doc Odessa, Texas
Activist advice and request for feedback.
Steve wrote in response to a question about PETA's tactics: I agree, but I also see PETA as a group that's getting results. Look at all of the fast food restaurant chains now agreeing to go easier on their animals. McDonalds, Burger King, and I think Wendy's have all agreed to better standards for their layer hens and other animals. I don't think any other organization has achieved anything close to what PETA has. Do the ends justify the means? Not always, but in PETA's case I think the "means" haven't been too outrageous as to step over a line into "terrorism" or whatnot. So I think their tactics are okay.
> Pritikin, as one rational scientific doctor, moved more people towards
> then all of Peta's actions combined. That kind of rational, reasoned appeal is
> where vegetarians should focus.
Yeah, I know. We need to have groups doing more scientific research into veganism's health and other aspects. Being able to say conclusively that a vegan diet is superior to a meat-based one is a big gun to have on our side. And to some extent we already have it. But I find that meat eaters rationalize away all of the pro-vegan health arguments by saying that statistics don't mean anything and that the research was biased or whatnot. Even with countless many reports on all aspects of the diet, their minds frantically look for any way out of it. Their behavior is predictable, and I don't think it'll get any better with increased research. The only thing research would do is to put the information into the hands of physicians and family doctors who might suggest to their patients to go to veganism if they have a history of heart disease or cancer in their family, but I still don't see them strongly recommending it. I'd say probably half of the family doctors wouldn't even recommend against smoking too vehemently if they knew one of their patients was a smoker.
Plain and simple... People are going to be selfish, undisciplined, and closed minded no matter what the research shows. They'll find ways to rationalize away any of the anti-meat / pro-vegan research they encounter. What we need to do as a group is to investigate all of those rationalizations and proactively counter them. Diet and health is just one aspect. There are many more in terms of ethics and the environment. Get into a debate with one of them. You'll see that they'll find real clever (but illogical) ways around all of your arguments. And all it takes is for one of your arguments to be proven weak or incorrect for them to discount all of your arguments. We need to develop our arguments to such a degree that there is no way to rationalize around them. And that ain't easy.