I want to start by saying I totally agree that these points are clearly under-appreciated by most vegans, and this post gives that message really well.
That said, I think we shouldn’t leave out reasons for being vegan aside from the number of animals theoretically saved. For instance:
1. Whether you consume dairy or not has a social signalling effect. It can show others that you oppose all forms of animal exploitation, whereas being vegetarian only shows that you’re against the consumption of meat. Alternatively, it might have a lesser signal if people merely see you as extreme, and see the reducitarian as reasonable. I’m open to arguments either way, but I think the social signal is important.
2. Whether you consume animal products can have a psychological effect. It’s been shown that eating meat makes people more likely to deny moral status and mind to those animals (Loughnan, Haslam, & Bastian 2010). This finding has been replicated in Bratanova et al. 2011 and Droz et al. 2025. So then eating meat as an animal advocate seems like a pretty bad idea. Does this extend to milk or cheese, or a biscuit containing 2% butter? Well, probably much less. But my own anecdotal experience is that it has been useful to view animal products as something not-to-be-eaten. I feel it reinforces my empathy and my awareness of how messed up the world is. To be clear, I don’t think this is a decisive reason. But it is one worth adding to the analysis.
So maybe after considering these you’ll still find reasons to eat dairy. But I do think they’re likely to change calculations such as those given by @Vasco Grilo🔸, especially with a long-term theory of change in which social and psychological effects are important.
Yup this post is written with many of my vegan friends in mind (as well as me from not that long ago). I’ve found “saving” lives matters most to them and a distant second is usually reducing suffering.
I intentionally left out reasons to be vegan because the average vegan influencer is basically sharing all of these points. Which makes it readily accessible. Although I do agree some of what you are saying.
For 1, I think this depends on the audience. If the audience are ethical vegetarians who don’t know about harms in dairy then this is indeed quite effective. Although for an average consumer, I’ve found (anecdotally from street outreach) that most of them find quitting dairy a much more unattainable goal than being vegetarian (which is quite disliked by many vegans).
For 2, I agree. I think most humans are motivated reasoners. They figure out ways to justify and confirm their existing beliefs as well as reasons for not changing. I also think getting people to consume delicious animal free food may accelerate progress towards respecting animals (for this same reason). Although it may not be fast enough if we advocate for abstinence as compared to just building better alternatives. I wrote about this in an earlier post.
My only hope with this article is that more people take the final impact on animals seriously.
I agree that your point is perhaps less widely shared than mine. But my own view has come to be that the number of animals killed is actually rather unimportant, since I don’t expect that these industries will be greatly affected by the consumer choices of some citizens. I expect that political action and technology will play much bigger roles. And then the question becomes: is diet change important for political identity/action?
I think if the change requires minimal/smaller sacrifice on part of the consumer it’s more likely to succeed. Also even if systemic/technological change can have much higher impact, I would not rule out diet change completely because I also came across this post which questions the PTC hypothesis for alternative proteins.
I want to start by saying I totally agree that these points are clearly under-appreciated by most vegans, and this post gives that message really well.
That said, I think we shouldn’t leave out reasons for being vegan aside from the number of animals theoretically saved. For instance:
1. Whether you consume dairy or not has a social signalling effect. It can show others that you oppose all forms of animal exploitation, whereas being vegetarian only shows that you’re against the consumption of meat. Alternatively, it might have a lesser signal if people merely see you as extreme, and see the reducitarian as reasonable. I’m open to arguments either way, but I think the social signal is important.
2. Whether you consume animal products can have a psychological effect. It’s been shown that eating meat makes people more likely to deny moral status and mind to those animals (Loughnan, Haslam, & Bastian 2010). This finding has been replicated in Bratanova et al. 2011 and Droz et al. 2025. So then eating meat as an animal advocate seems like a pretty bad idea. Does this extend to milk or cheese, or a biscuit containing 2% butter? Well, probably much less. But my own anecdotal experience is that it has been useful to view animal products as something not-to-be-eaten. I feel it reinforces my empathy and my awareness of how messed up the world is. To be clear, I don’t think this is a decisive reason. But it is one worth adding to the analysis.
So maybe after considering these you’ll still find reasons to eat dairy. But I do think they’re likely to change calculations such as those given by @Vasco Grilo🔸, especially with a long-term theory of change in which social and psychological effects are important.
Thanks Tristan.
Yup this post is written with many of my vegan friends in mind (as well as me from not that long ago). I’ve found “saving” lives matters most to them and a distant second is usually reducing suffering.
I intentionally left out reasons to be vegan because the average vegan influencer is basically sharing all of these points. Which makes it readily accessible. Although I do agree some of what you are saying.
For 1, I think this depends on the audience. If the audience are ethical vegetarians who don’t know about harms in dairy then this is indeed quite effective. Although for an average consumer, I’ve found (anecdotally from street outreach) that most of them find quitting dairy a much more unattainable goal than being vegetarian (which is quite disliked by many vegans).
For 2, I agree. I think most humans are motivated reasoners. They figure out ways to justify and confirm their existing beliefs as well as reasons for not changing. I also think getting people to consume delicious animal free food may accelerate progress towards respecting animals (for this same reason). Although it may not be fast enough if we advocate for abstinence as compared to just building better alternatives. I wrote about this in an earlier post.
My only hope with this article is that more people take the final impact on animals seriously.
I agree that your point is perhaps less widely shared than mine. But my own view has come to be that the number of animals killed is actually rather unimportant, since I don’t expect that these industries will be greatly affected by the consumer choices of some citizens. I expect that political action and technology will play much bigger roles. And then the question becomes: is diet change important for political identity/action?
I think if the change requires minimal/smaller sacrifice on part of the consumer it’s more likely to succeed. Also even if systemic/technological change can have much higher impact, I would not rule out diet change completely because I also came across this post which questions the PTC hypothesis for alternative proteins.