Your “what about plants” argument is such a worn-out trope that you must have seen it before and read a valid explanation of why it makes no sense.

Peter Singer has been writing on the topic for decades, including others. What-about-plants needs to fade away.

That's fair, but "what about animals" is to "we should not torture human brain organoids" as "what about plants" is to "we should not torture animals".

I am suffering substantially more psychic damage from being forced to watch videos of pig euthanasia at meathouses than any pig has ever suffered from being euthanized at one of those meathouses, because I have 10x the neurons as a pig and therefore e^10 more capacity for pain.

I am not aware of any plants that show signs of consciousness or feelings. This would even by disadvantageous to many plants because they "want" parts of them to be eaten to disperse seeds, pollen, etc.

Even if you accept that plants might be conscious and their suffering has to be reduced, you would still harm way fewer plants by eating them directly instead of eating other animals that consume them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophic_level

Perhaps you are not looking that closely? Plants have memory and demonstrate directed action through time and space. They can respond to touch, light, sound, and chemical signalling from other plants, insects, and fungi. What are the fingerprints of consciousness and feelings that you are looking for?

arguing on hn