The vegan phenomenon was born in England in 1944 out of a rift in the Vegetarian Society. A fierce debate arose around the moral implications of dairy consumption. For some, the food in question caused no harm to cows and was therefore permitted. For others, the very fact that cows were being exploited to produce milk and thus dairy products was morally unacceptable. This second group exited the society and formed the new Vegan Society.
In addition to food, vegans adopt behaviors and choices cruelty free in all areas of their lives; in fact, they avoid any products made from the exploitation of animals, such as goose down comforters, clothing made of wool, silk or leather, and cosmetics tested on animals.
Statistics
Eurispes, in its Italy 2015 Report, clearly outlines the situation from a demographic perspective:
- vegetarians in our country are 6.5% of the population, or 3.8 million people, up 25% from 2013
- vegans, on the other hand, are 0.6%, a total of 400,000 people, down sharply from 2013 (-55%)
Thus, non-oneaters are 4.2 million Italians, 7.1% of the total.
The great variability in the population of non-monivores is also confirmed by authoritative research by the Humane Research Council of Washington, which surveyed more than 11,000 Americans in 2014. This research showed that the percentage of non-nivores who retrace their steps and resume eating meat, eggs, dairy products, etc., etc., reaches 84%.
The motivations for moving toward the non-onion diet are:
- sensitivity to the animal world: 31%
- Belief that it is a healthier diet: 24%
- sensitivity to ecological and environmental sustainability issues: 9%
- other reasons (of which the most important is probably the rejection of intensive farming systems): 36%
A very noisy minority
So the vegan phenomenon is about the minority of a minority, yet in the media their presence is remarkable. How come? Here are some plausible explanations:
- their ethical motivations (avoiding animal cruelty) lead them to aggressive behaviors toward people who do not have the same sensitivity as they do. In other words: they set themselves up as champions of all animal species, and the champions must be active, going to save their protégés wherever they are in danger, not just in the kitchen;
- by a business point of view companies cannot provide two different types of food for non-nivores, so they prefer to adopt the stricter standards and sell food for vegans, which vegetarians can also buy anyway;
– Extremists always work well in the media: they attract attention, spark discussion, generate clicks and shares.
Is the vegan diet bad for you or good for you?
The scientific community largely agrees that the vegan diet is not detrimental to health, as long as care is taken to ensure proper intake of all nutrients, that is, using protein supplements.
Instead, establishing whether the vegan diet is better or worse, from a health perspective, than the omnivorous diet is almost impossible. Such a scientific survey would have to run for at least a decade and would have to have an extremely large, cross-national sample.
Instead, there is a trend for what concerns mental health. For the delicacy of the topic we will use the very thoughtful words of Dr. Anna Momigliano: "so far no one has been able to firmly establish whether vegans and vegetarians tend to have more mental disorders than omnivores. However, there are more studies that lean toward this conclusion than those that lean toward the opposite conclusion, and among them is the one conducted on the largest and most representative sample." Mental disorders are essentially defined as anxiety and depression.
Sources: Ilpost.co.uk.
