PhotosVideosAllPeople
Suggested reply Wilson's, fair enough in part: on maintenance therapy, only liver and shellfish stay consistently avoided, and a careful patient could go vegan with monitoring. Conceded. But "NONE of the diseases" doesn't survive contact with hereditary fructose intolerance, where the treatment is eliminating fructose - the defining sugar of plants. No fruit, most vegetables restricted, and clinical guidance centers on meat, dairy and eggs as the safe staples. MSUD likewise restricts legumes, nuts and beans alongside meat and dairy, with 80-90% of protein coming from medical formula. Short-bowel patients live on parenteral nutrition. And notice the goalpost move: my claim was that veganism isn't healthy for everyone, not that diseases "preclude" it. If your definition of vegan is loose enough that a patient surviving on synthetic medical formula "eats vegan," then nothing precludes veganism - and the word no longer means anything. The Vegan Society itself defines veganism as excluding animal exploitation "as far as is possible and practicable." The exception is built into your own definition. It's not a secret either.