Sometimes plant-based is used as a more socially acceptable word for "vegan". I think there's also a difference between titling a product "vegan" and specifying that it is vegan. "Vegan donuts" isn't as appealing to non-vegans as "Donuts (vegan)". Likewise I'd be discouraged to get something labeled "Gluten free cookies", but if I saw "Oatmeal chocolate chip cookies (gluten-free)" I wouldn't hold it against them.

On a related note: When I was vegan, I said I exclusively ate things made from plants. It was better received and understood. Also I would antagonize friends by giving them vegan pb&js, vegan pickles, vegan French fries, vegan Coke, etc.

No mushrooms or fermented products for you?

(I know you were just trying to give people a simplified model.)

Are you just giving random examples or is regular Coke not vegan?

Regular coke is about as vegan as regular pickles.

Interestingly, if it's 'throwback' coke with white/processed sugar in it, it's NOT vegan, as animal products (mostly bone/etc.) are used in the production of that sugar. HFCS modern coke is generally considered vegan.

Pretty terrible analogy. I have no idea if pickles are vegan or not. I would assume they are but I'm not steeped in the vegan ethos and many things have surprised me in the past as being non-vegan.

Animal products are constantly snuck into processed, preserved and packaged foods. I'd find it funny, but wouldn't be surprised, to find that something derived from an animal found its way into a jar of pickles 'for flavor'.

Vegan french fries is the stand out here. Many commercially available ones are flavored and/or cooked with non-vegan ingredients.

> I wonder if there's an elegant/clean way to denote that something is vegan but not changed to be vegan.

Naturally free of animal products?

"naturally vegan" seems most appropriate, no?

"Low carbon"?