Introduction: A Choice That Shapes Our World
The decision to adopt a vegetarian lifestyle represents far more than a dietary preference—it embodies a comprehensive worldview that touches upon personal health, moral philosophy, environmental stewardship, and planetary sustainability. As philosopher Peter Singer observes, “Becoming a vegetarian is not merely a symbolic gesture. Nor is it an attempt to isolate oneself from the ugly realities of the world… Becoming a vegetarian is a highly practical and effective step one can take toward ending both the killing of nonhuman animals and the infliction of suffering on them.”¹ This essay examines vegetarianism through multiple lenses, presenting scientific evidence, philosophical arguments, and practical guidelines that collectively demonstrate why plant-based diets represent not just a viable alternative, but potentially an imperative for human health and planetary survival.
The urgency of this examination has never been greater. With food systems contributing between 21-37% of global greenhouse gas emissions² and diet-related diseases claiming more lives than any other cause³, the intersection of personal dietary choices and collective outcomes demands rigorous scrutiny. Recent research from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics confirms that “appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan dietary patterns can be nutritionally adequate and can offer long-term health benefits such as improving several health outcomes associated with cardiometabolic diseases.”⁴ This comprehensive analysis explores how individual dietary choices ripple outward to affect not only personal health but the very fabric of ecological and ethical systems that sustain life on Earth.
Part I: The Health Imperative – Scientific Evidence for Vegetarian Diets
Cardiovascular disease prevention through plant-based eating
The scientific consensus on vegetarianism’s cardiovascular benefits has crystallized into compelling evidence. A comprehensive 2024 meta-analysis led by Dr. Matthew Landry of UC Irvine found that vegetarian diets reduce cardiovascular disease incidence by 15% and cardiovascular mortality by 8%.⁵ Dr. Landry emphasizes the clinical significance: “Our findings suggest that general health practitioners can recommend vegetarian and vegan dietary patterns to those patients who are at high risk for heart attacks or have poor heart health.”⁶
The mechanisms underlying these benefits are multifaceted. Plant-based diets naturally contain no cholesterol and are typically lower in saturated fat, leading to improved lipid profiles. Harvard’s landmark research involving over 76,000 participants revealed that vegetarians were 25% less likely to die of heart disease.⁷ These improvements manifest rapidly—the 2023 Stanford Twin Study demonstrated that identical twins following vegan diets for just eight weeks showed significantly lower LDL cholesterol and insulin levels compared to their omnivorous siblings.⁸
Dr. Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, has conducted NIH-funded research demonstrating remarkable results: “A plant-based diet controlled blood sugar three times more effectively than a traditional diabetes diet that limited calories and carbohydrates. Within weeks on a plant-based diet, participants saw dramatic health improvements.”⁹ In his clinical trials, 43% of vegan diet participants reduced their diabetes medications, compared to only 26% following American Diabetes Association recommendations.¹⁰
Cancer prevention and reduced mortality risks
The relationship between vegetarian diets and cancer prevention represents another compelling health argument. The 2022 UK Biobank study, analyzing 472,377 participants, found that vegetarians had a 14% lower risk of all cancers, with particularly striking reductions in colorectal cancer (43% lower risk in men) and prostate cancer (31% lower risk).¹¹ Lead researcher Cody Watling of Oxford Population Health notes, “Our study found that being a low meat-eater, fish-eater, or vegetarian was associated with a significantly lower risk of all cancer.”¹²
The protective mechanisms appear to involve multiple pathways. Plant-based diets are naturally rich in phytochemicals, antioxidants, and fiber while being lower in heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons—carcinogenic compounds formed during meat cooking. Dr. Gary Fraser’s research with Adventist populations, who have provided unique opportunities for dietary studies due to their health-conscious lifestyles, shows up to 45% reduction in gastrointestinal cancer risk among vegetarians.¹³
Longevity studies reinforce these findings. The Adventist Health Study, following 73,308 adults over six years, found vegetarians were 12% less likely to die during the study period, with the lowest mortality rates observed among vegans and lacto-ovo vegetarians.¹⁴ European cohort studies confirm similar patterns, showing 9% lower risk of death from all causes compared to omnivores.¹⁵
Part II: Moral and Philosophical Foundations
The utilitarian argument for animal consideration
The philosophical case for vegetarianism finds its modern foundation in Jeremy Bentham’s revolutionary 1789 observation: “The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”¹⁶ This insight shifted the moral calculus from cognitive capacity to sentience—the ability to experience pain and pleasure—as the relevant criterion for moral consideration.
Contemporary philosopher Peter Singer has expanded this utilitarian framework in his seminal work “Animal Liberation,” arguing that “Pain is pain, and the importance of preventing unnecessary pain and suffering does not diminish because the being that suffers is not a member of our own species.”¹⁷ Singer’s argument rests on the principle of equal consideration of interests: if we accept that unnecessary suffering is wrong, then the species of the sufferer becomes morally irrelevant. He challenges anthropocentric thinking directly: “If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his or her own ends, how can it entitle humans to exploit non-humans?”¹⁸
The utilitarian calculus extends beyond individual suffering to aggregate consequences. Singer notes that “By ceasing to rear and kill animals for food, we can make so much extra food available for humans that, properly distributed, it would eliminate starvation and malnutrition from this planet. Animal Liberation is Human Liberation too.”¹⁹ This perspective frames vegetarianism not as sacrifice but as optimization of wellbeing across all sentient beings.
Rights-based approaches and inherent value
Tom Regan offers a deontological alternative through his rights-based approach, arguing that animals possess inherent value as “subjects-of-a-life.” In “The Case for Animal Rights,” Regan contends that beings who “want and prefer things, believe and feel things, recall and expect things” possess inherent value that commands respect regardless of their utility to others.²⁰ This framework establishes inviolable rights that cannot be overridden by utilitarian calculations.
Gary Francione extends this abolitionist approach, arguing that “We can no more justify using nonhumans as human resources than we can justify human slavery. Animal use and slavery have at least one important point in common: both institutions treat sentient beings exclusively as resources of others.”²¹ Francione’s position is uncompromising: if animals have moral value beyond their instrumental use, then using them as resources becomes fundamentally unjustifiable.
The rights perspective reframes the discussion from welfare to justice. As Regan emphasizes, “To be ‘for animals’ is not to be ‘against humanity.’ To require others to treat animals justly, as their rights require, is not to ask for anything more nor less in their case than in the case of any human to whom just treatment is due.”²² This positions animal rights as continuous with, rather than opposed to, human rights movements.
Religious and spiritual dimensions
Vegetarianism finds deep roots across religious traditions. Hindu philosophy’s principle of ahimsa (non-violence) extends compassion to all living beings. The Mahabharata declares: “Those high-souled persons who desire beauty, faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental and physical strength, and memory, should abstain from acts of injury.”²³ This links spiritual development directly to dietary choices, suggesting that violence toward animals impedes human flourishing.
Buddhism’s First Precept against killing encompasses dietary implications. The Dhammapada teaches: “All beings tremble before danger, all fear death. When a man considers this, he does not kill or cause to kill.”²⁴ The Mahayana tradition specifically mandates that followers “must not eat the flesh of any sentient being,”²⁵ viewing meat consumption as incompatible with cultivating compassion.
Jainism represents perhaps the most comprehensive application of non-violence, where “every act by which a person directly or indirectly supports killing or injury is seen as an act of violence (himsa), which creates harmful reaction karma.”²⁶ This tradition demonstrates the logical endpoint of taking animal suffering seriously within a spiritual framework.
Part III: Environmental and Planetary Perspectives
Climate change and greenhouse gas emissions
The environmental case for vegetarianism has become increasingly urgent as climate science reveals the substantial contribution of animal agriculture to global warming. According to the most recent FAO assessments, livestock supply chains contribute 14.5% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, totaling 7.1 gigatons of CO2 equivalent annually.²⁷ When updated methodologies are applied, some researchers suggest the figure approaches 16.5%.²⁸
The mechanisms are multifaceted: 45% of emissions come from feed production and processing, 39% from enteric fermentation (methane from ruminant digestion), and 10% from manure decomposition.²⁹ Cattle alone account for 62% of livestock emissions, making beef particularly carbon-intensive.³⁰ Johan Rockström, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, states unequivocally: “If you fix food, you fix the planet.”³¹
Recent modeling in Nature Climate Change demonstrates that global adoption of the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet would reduce dietary emissions by 17%, with the 56.9% of the global population currently overconsuming able to achieve 32.4% of global emission reductions through dietary shifts.³² The UK’s comprehensive 2023 study found even more dramatic potential: vegan diets result in 75% less climate-heating emissions compared to high-meat diets.³³
Resource efficiency and land use transformation
The inefficiency of animal agriculture in resource utilization presents a compelling argument for plant-based systems. Current data reveals that livestock uses 77% of agricultural land while providing only 18% of calories and 37% of protein.³⁴ This disproportionate land use drives deforestation, with agriculture accounting for 70% of global forest loss.³⁵
Water consumption patterns are equally striking. Beef production requires approximately 1,800 gallons of water per pound, compared to 220 gallons for wheat and 260 gallons for soybeans.³⁶ The US livestock sector alone consumes 72,650 billion gallons annually, with 99% used for feed production.³⁷ Notably, efficiency improvements have achieved a 36% reduction in water consumption per unit of production since 1960, demonstrating potential for further optimization.³⁸
The IPCC’s 2023 Synthesis Report emphasizes that dietary changes offer 0.7–8.0 GtCO2-eq yr⁻¹ in technical mitigation potential by 2050, positioning food system transformation among the most impactful climate interventions available.³⁹ The report specifically highlights diets “high in coarse grains, pulses, fruits and vegetables, and nuts and seeds; low in energy-intensive animal-sourced and discretionary foods” as optimal for both health and climate outcomes.⁴⁰
Biodiversity conservation and ecosystem restoration
Animal agriculture’s impact on biodiversity extends beyond habitat destruction to ecosystem disruption. The IPCC reports that climate change has already caused hundreds of local species losses and forced approximately half of assessed species to shift their ranges.⁴¹ Agricultural expansion increases ecosystem vulnerability, creating cascading effects through food webs.
The potential for ecosystem restoration through dietary transition is substantial. Research in PLOS Climate suggests that rapid global phase-out of animal agriculture could stabilize greenhouse gas levels for 30 years and provide 68% offset of CO2 emissions this century through reforestation of freed agricultural land.⁴² UK research confirms co-benefits: vegan diets reduce wildlife destruction by 66% and land use by 75% compared to high-meat diets.⁴³
Part IV: Practical Dietary Implementation
Essential nutrients and evidence-based recommendations
The transition to vegetarianism requires attention to specific nutrients to ensure optimal health. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics confirms that well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for all life stages, but emphasizes the importance of strategic nutrient planning.⁴⁴
Protein requirements are easily met through diverse plant sources. Adults need approximately 0.4 grams per pound of body weight daily, with vegans potentially requiring 0.45 grams due to digestibility differences.⁴⁵ Complete proteins are available from soy products, quinoa, buckwheat, hemp seeds, and chia seeds. Traditional combinations like rice with beans or hummus with pita provide complementary amino acids. Research confirms that “protein-rich foods such as traditional legumes, nuts and seeds are sufficient to achieve full protein adequacy.”⁴⁶
Vitamin B12 represents the most critical supplementation need for vegetarians, particularly vegans. Dr. Michael Greger emphasizes: “Vitamin B12 deficiency is serious and can cause anemia, nerve damage, neurocognitive changes, and, over time, paralysis. The good news is that vitamin B12 deficiency can easily be prevented.”⁴⁷ Evidence-based recommendations include either 250 micrograms daily, 2,500 micrograms weekly, or multiple servings of fortified foods providing 4 micrograms total.⁴⁸
Optimizing iron absorption and omega-3 intake
Iron presents unique considerations for vegetarians due to lower bioavailability of non-heme iron. Requirements are approximately 1.8 times higher than for omnivores—32mg daily for adult women and 14mg for adult men.⁴⁹ However, strategic food combinations dramatically enhance absorption. Vitamin C consumed with iron-rich foods can increase absorption by 67% to 400%, depending on the meal composition.⁵⁰
Optimal combinations include lemon juice on leafy greens, orange juice with fortified cereals, or bell peppers with legumes. Conversely, tea, coffee, and calcium supplements should be consumed separately from iron-rich meals to avoid absorption interference.⁵¹
Omega-3 fatty acids require special attention since plant sources provide primarily alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), which converts poorly to EPA and DHA. Daily requirements can be met through 2 tablespoons ground flaxseeds or chia seeds, 1/4 cup hemp seeds, or 2/3 cup walnuts.⁵² For optimal brain health and inflammation reduction, Dr. Greger recommends algae-based supplements providing 200mg DHA plus 100mg EPA daily.⁵³
Practical meal planning frameworks
Dr. Michael Greger’s “Daily Dozen” provides a comprehensive framework for nutritional adequacy: three servings of beans, one serving of berries, three servings of other fruits, one serving of cruciferous vegetables, two servings of greens, two servings of other vegetables, one tablespoon ground flaxseeds, one serving nuts/seeds, herbs and spices including turmeric, three servings of whole grains, and adequate hydration.⁵⁴
Registered dietitian Brenda Davis recommends structuring plates with one-quarter whole grains, one-quarter legumes, and half vegetables, supplemented with fruits, nuts, and seeds.⁵⁵ This approach ensures macronutrient balance while maximizing micronutrient density.
Sample daily menus demonstrate practical application. Breakfast might feature oatmeal with berries, ground flaxseed, walnuts, and fortified plant milk. Lunch could include a large salad with chickpeas, tahini dressing, and pumpkin seeds, accompanied by whole grain bread. Dinner might consist of stir-fried tofu and broccoli with brown rice, incorporating both protein and vitamin C for iron absorption. Snacks of fruit with nut butter or hummus with vegetables provide additional nutrients and satiety.
Part V: Overcoming Barriers and Misconceptions
Addressing protein myths and athletic performance
The persistent myth that plant-based diets cannot support athletic performance has been definitively refuted. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics states that vegetarian diets are “appropriate for athletes”⁵⁶ at all competitive levels. Elite athletes from ultra-marathoner Scott Jurek to tennis champion Venus Williams demonstrate that plant-based diets can fuel extraordinary performance.
Strongman Patrick Baboumian addresses the protein myth directly: “Someone asked me ‘how can you get as strong as an ox without eating any meat?’ and my answer was, ‘have you ever seen an ox eating meat?'”⁵⁷ The documentary “The Game Changers” presents compelling evidence that plant-based athletes often experience improved recovery times, reduced inflammation, and enhanced endurance compared to omnivorous counterparts.
Economic considerations and accessibility
Contrary to perceptions of vegetarianism as economically privileged, research demonstrates significant cost savings. A 2024 JAMA Network Open study found that vegan diets reduce food costs by 16%, yielding annual savings exceeding $500 per person.⁵⁸ Dr. Hana Kahleova notes: “We knew that a vegan diet significantly reduces your risk of conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and obesity—and now we have proof that opting for beans instead of beef will also lead to significant savings on your grocery bill.”⁵⁹
The economic argument extends beyond individual savings to healthcare systems. Given that diet-related diseases consume enormous healthcare resources, population-level dietary shifts could yield substantial economic benefits through reduced medical costs and increased productivity.
Cultural adaptation and social navigation
Vegetarianism’s growth across diverse cultures demonstrates its adaptability. Traditional cuisines from India, Ethiopia, Mediterranean regions, and East Asia offer rich vegetarian traditions that can be drawn upon. The key lies not in abandoning cultural identity but in rediscovering plant-based elements within cultural traditions.
Julia Zumpano, registered dietitian at Cleveland Clinic, offers practical advice: “You don’t necessarily need to avoid an entire food group completely, but you can instill eating more meatless meals, which can help ease some of the anxiety and stress around going fully vegetarian, but still incorporating the habits and the benefits of a vegetarian diet.”⁶⁰ This gradual approach allows for social adaptation while maintaining health benefits.
Part VI: Future Perspectives and Global Implications
Feeding ten billion sustainably
The EAT-Lancet Commission’s analysis demonstrates that feeding 10 billion people by 2050 within planetary boundaries is “both possible and necessary” through dietary transformation.⁶¹ Adoption of the planetary health diet would prevent approximately 11 million premature deaths annually while ensuring food security for all.⁶² This requires doubling vegetable consumption and halving red meat and sugar intake globally, with variations based on regional starting points.⁶³
Walter Willett of Harvard emphasizes the flexibility within this framework: “The food group intake ranges that we suggest allow flexibility to accommodate various food types, agricultural systems, cultural traditions, and individual dietary preferences – including numerous omnivore, vegetarian, and vegan diets.”⁶⁴ This acknowledges that sustainable food systems must respect cultural diversity while achieving health and environmental goals.
Technological innovation and alternative proteins
The convergence of food technology and environmental necessity is accelerating alternatives to animal agriculture. Precision fermentation, cellular agriculture, and sophisticated plant-based analogues are rapidly approaching price parity with conventional animal products. These innovations may provide transition pathways for populations reluctant to abandon familiar foods entirely.
However, technology alone cannot substitute for dietary pattern shifts. Whole plant foods remain nutritionally superior to processed alternatives and should form the foundation of healthy vegetarian diets. The role of technology lies in facilitating transition and providing occasional indulgences rather than dietary staples.
Policy implications and systemic change
Individual dietary choices, while important, require supportive policy environments to achieve population-level impact. Potential interventions include redirecting agricultural subsidies from animal agriculture to plant production, implementing true-cost accounting that incorporates environmental externalities, and updating dietary guidelines to reflect current evidence on health and sustainability.
The UN’s assessment that “about a third of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions is linked to food”⁶⁵ underscores the urgency of systemic intervention. Maria Helena Semedo, FAO Deputy Director-General, emphasizes: “We need to act now at scale. Building sustainable and resilient agrifood systems is fundamental to tackling the climate crisis, food insecurity and biodiversity loss.”⁶⁶
Conclusion: The Convergence of Personal and Planetary Health
The evidence for vegetarianism converges across multiple domains to present a compelling case for dietary transformation. From the 15% reduction in cardiovascular disease to the 75% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, from the philosophical imperative to minimize suffering to the practical necessity of feeding 10 billion sustainably, plant-based diets emerge not as one option among many but as an increasingly necessary adaptation to contemporary realities.
Albert Einstein’s observation that “Nothing will benefit human health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet”⁶⁷ appears increasingly prophetic. The alignment of personal health optimization with planetary sustainability represents a rare convergence where individual and collective interests unite.
The transition to vegetarianism need not be viewed as deprivation but as liberation—from chronic disease, from participation in animal suffering, from environmental destruction. As Gary Francione eloquently states: “Veganism is not about giving anything up or losing anything; it is about gaining the peace within yourself that comes from embracing nonviolence and refusing to participate in the exploitation of the vulnerable.”⁶⁸
The path forward requires neither perfection nor immediate transformation but rather conscious movement toward plant-based eating at whatever pace individuals and societies can sustain. Every meal represents a choice, and collectively, these choices shape the health of individuals, the welfare of animals, and the habitability of our planet. The convergence of scientific evidence, ethical reasoning, and practical necessity makes clear that vegetarianism represents not merely a dietary choice but a comprehensive response to the interconnected challenges of our time.
Notes
¹ Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (New York: HarperCollins, 1975), 171.
² IPCC, “Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report,” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2023.
³ Michael Greger, How Not to Die (New York: Flatiron Books, 2015), 1.
⁴ Sudha Raj et al., “Vegetarian Dietary Patterns for Adults: A Position Paper of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics,” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 125, no. 6 (2025): 831-846.
⁵ Matthew J. Landry et al., “Vegetarian dietary patterns and cardiovascular risk factors and disease prevention: An umbrella review of systematic reviews,” American Journal of Preventive Cardiology (2024).
⁶ Ibid.
⁷ Harvard Health Publishing, “Becoming a vegetarian,” Harvard Medical School, 2023.
⁸ Matthew J. Landry et al., “Cardiometabolic Effects of Omnivorous vs Vegan Diets in Identical Twins,” JAMA Network Open 6, no. 11 (2023).
⁹ Neal D. Barnard et al., “A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 89, no. 5 (2009): 1588S-1596S.
¹⁰ Ibid.
¹¹ Cody Z. Watling et al., “Risk of cancer in regular and low meat-eaters, fish-eaters, and vegetarians: a prospective analysis of UK Biobank participants,” BMC Medicine 20, no. 73 (2022).
¹² Ibid.
¹³ Gary E. Fraser, Adventist Health Study publications in epidemiological journals.
¹⁴ Michael J. Orlich et al., “Vegetarian dietary patterns and mortality in Adventist Health Study 2,” JAMA Internal Medicine 173, no. 13 (2013): 1230-1238.
¹⁵ Multiple European cohort studies compiled in systematic reviews.
¹⁶ Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), Chapter XVII, footnote 122.
¹⁷ Singer, Animal Liberation, 17.
¹⁸ Ibid., 6.
¹⁹ Ibid., Chapter 1, 22.
²⁰ Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), 243.
²¹ Gary L. Francione, Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2000).
²² Regan, The Case for Animal Rights.
²³ Mahabharata, Anushasana Parva.
²⁴ Dhammapada 129.
²⁵ Lankavatara Sutra.
²⁶ Jain philosophical texts on ahimsa.
²⁷ FAO, “Livestock’s Long Shadow,” Food and Agriculture Organization, 2023.
²⁸ Richard Twine, “Emissions from Animal Agriculture—16.5% Is the New Minimum Figure,” Sustainability 13, no. 11 (2021): 6276.
²⁹ FAO, “Livestock’s Long Shadow.”
³⁰ Ibid.
³¹ Johan Rockström, statement at 2023 Villars Summit.
³² Nature Climate Change study, 2024.
³³ UK comprehensive study, 2023.
³⁴ IPCC, “Climate Change and Land,” 2023.
³⁵ Ibid.
³⁶ Water Footprint Network data.
³⁷ US livestock water consumption study, 2014-2016.
³⁸ Ibid.
³⁹ IPCC, “Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report.”
⁴⁰ Ibid.
⁴¹ IPCC Assessment on Ecosystem Impacts, 2023.
⁴² PLOS Climate study, 2022.
⁴³ UK research, 2023.
⁴⁴ Raj et al., “Vegetarian Dietary Patterns for Adults.”
⁴⁵ Brenda Davis, The Vegan Plate (various publications).
⁴⁶ Ibid.
⁴⁷ Michael Greger, NutritionFacts.org.
⁴⁸ The Vegan Society evidence-based guidelines.
⁴⁹ Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommendations.
⁵⁰ Iron absorption studies, various.
⁵¹ Ibid.
⁵² Davis, The Vegan Plate.
⁵³ Greger, NutritionFacts.org.
⁵⁴ Greger, How Not to Die.
⁵⁵ Davis, The Vegan Plate.
⁵⁶ Raj et al., “Vegetarian Dietary Patterns for Adults.”
⁵⁷ Patrick Baboumian, The Game Changers documentary (2019).
⁵⁸ Hana Kahleova et al., “Food costs of a low-fat vegan diet vs a Mediterranean diet: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial,” JAMA Network Open 7, no. 11 (2024).
⁵⁹ Ibid.
⁶⁰ Julia Zumpano, “Thinking You May Want to Try a Vegetarian Diet But Not Sure Where to Start?” Cleveland Clinic Love Your Heart Podcast, 2025.
⁶¹ EAT-Lancet Commission, “Food in the Anthropocene,” 2019.
⁶² Ibid.
⁶³ Ibid.
⁶⁴ Walter Willett, EAT-Lancet Commission.
⁶⁵ UN Climate Change, 2023.
⁶⁶ Maria Helena Semedo, FAO, 2023.
⁶⁷ Albert Einstein, Letter to Hans Muehsam, 1954, published in Albert Einstein: The Human Side.
⁶⁸ Gary L. Francione, various writings.