I would just like to point out that almost everything that we eat was once alive or came form something that was alive. And sometimes when we harvest our food, we kill the plants that preduce it. Yes, plants are alive. The pasta that you had for dinner last night had wheat in it, wheat was once alive.

The first sentence of your comment is irritating beyond all belief. Just because we are sentient doesn't me we can "choose" what our body needs to survive. Choosing to not eat meat may be acceptable today with man-made, nutrient enriched foods, but when our digestive systems were first developing, these sort of luxuries were not available. In nature, it is not only beneficial but necessary for survival to eat meat. Even with new sorts of food available today, it has still been proven that certain nutrients, like phosphorus, are more easily processed when aquired from meat. In foods like cereals, phosphorus is present in phytic acid, which needs to be hydrolized before the body can use it. Phosphorus in meat can be absorbed without being hydrolized, expending less energy.

Now think about what you said about "choosing" our own food. By that same logic, do you find canabalism to be acceptable? Eating isn't an issue left up to personal choice or preference. If someone preferred to eat only potato chips and ice cream for the rest of their life, their doctor, friends, or family would tell them they shouldn't because A) these things are bad for our bodies and B) they wouldn't be receiving the nutrients necessary for our bodies to work properly.

And since you mentioned starving children, I'll have you know that it's not the poverty of the country that is keeping these families from getting food. The governments that run these countries keep these people in poverty so that they can live in luxury. I know of several cases personally of people who sent money or food to third-world countries and the government either sent the food back, saying it wasn't "good enough," took the money for themselves, or sold that very same food on the streets for the same prices that the people living there cannot afford. So don't tell people to send money when it's not going to do any good.

In all due respect, I don't agree. Firstly I found your opinion a little succint, and it lacks support in some parts... I mean, as most people stated meat isn't the only food that provides protein iron and nutrients. Secondly, you say it is the reason our 'species' has become smarter, healthier, stronger and more developed. I would agree with some of that, but it's not all true and definitely a minor cause. Also, the study seems a bit weird to me. 3000 meat-eaters against 600 non-meat-eaters? That's a bit unbalanced. Also, you mention that our species has 'evolved' specifically to eat meat. But this isn't all true, firstly because evolution is coincidence. It is actually because in prehistory, meat was pretty much a staple food (although the consomation levels were much lower) and so our system has a natural appreciation of it. Actually it is evolution, but not on purpose... if i make sense. Comparing our ancestors to people of today is not exactly right, I would say. Our brains will not expand because we take an larger portion of steak.

So... basically, I'm not sure if I agree. Seems like you need to back up the facts a little more (: