I am not challenging the merits of vegetables, as I realize they are absolutely essential for optimal health. One needs at least a moderate source of protein and fats with a plentiful source of vegetables to support a healthy metabolism.
No I didn't saying you were arguing (in the negative sense of the word). I meant argue as in, argue a case, which has a neutral connotation.
>One needs at least a moderate source of protein and fats with a plentiful source of vegetables to support a healthy metabolism.
How do you know? Because research/science said so?
Empirically, infact many people have lots of digestive problems with vegetables. Some health problems AFAIK believe can be reliably traced to excess consumption of some vegetables.
Do you see where I'm going with this?
This really is the wrong way to argue.
So what was the situation before we developed tests to detect amino acids and Vitamin B12? Did vegans get to correctly argue that nutritionally plants were equivalent to animal foods? No.
Well they still incorrectly argue based on what you said that all that one needs to do be successful vegan is to eat a variety, take some b12 and some protein power and the nutritional aspect is taken care off, They can also they can argue that plants contain useful compounds not found in animal foods, how do you you argue?
My point being that must ultimately look at the health outcome of each food group experimentally.