The last post was about how a diet of purely animal products isn't healthy. This can be seen by the fact that no one eats only animals products for optimum health.
A variety of plants can be consumed for optimal health, while a variety of animal products doesn't produce the same optimization of health. If it did, people would be eating purely animals products, yet they don't.
They animals we murder for our pleasure of taste (and not for survival because we can eat plants to survive and thrive) get their nutrients from the plants they consume. Instead of getting our nutrients from a secondary source in innocent animals, we can get all that we need from the source itself: plants.
Eating only the plant sources is healthier than eating only animal flesh. It's just a reality. If you argue that it isn't, show me how eating only animal products is producing healthy individuals for years and years, because I can show you plant-only eaters that are healthy for years and years. Most meat-eaters (carnists) eat plants too because plants are healthier. If you do your due diligence to look at what is required for health (vitamins, minerals, etc), the sources comes from plants, which are eaten by animals.
So why do we keep eating animal products if it's not as optimal for health? Because it's more cumbersome to eat several plants than to eat one piece of animal flesh to get your iron or whatever other nutrients you want to get. It's more difficult to go find and get a variety of plants to eat, at least it was more in the past. But now that the world is more connected, it's easier than ever and doable. A variety of plants has what animal flesh has.
We are stuck on lazy eating of getting our nutrients from animals because it's easier to do for eating. Eat a concentrated piece of animal muscle or other product, rather than a variety of plants.
Why not mix both plants and animals for the best diet?
Here is an analogy I think applies well, as I understand a diet for optimal health.
Eating both is like putting in diesel-flesh into your gas-plant-based engine, and then putting gas-plants to hopefully clean up the mess from the diesel-flesh. Maybe that's a crappy analogy, but I think it illustrates my point...
We are only behavioral carnivorous. Behaviors are conditioned. We are biologically able to survive on a carnivorous diet as omnivores, but our anatomical design is moe comparable to plant eating than flesh eating animals. The fact we "can" eat flesh, like anything we "can" eat, is a behavior or "story" introduced into our society through a need for bare survival. Cultures have their own preferences for what is culturally associated with their "story".
People adopted eating other humans as well in some societies, and this became their behavior and story. The adoption of eating meat became part of the customs/traditions/culture and so continued down the line, unquestioned as a current story, the current tradition/custom/culture.
These are adopted behaviors we have, and we can change them. We are individuals conditioned into following "stories". The story can change.
Prior to being able to kill or catch animals as a choice from our development of tools and technology to do such a thing, we didn’t eat animals. Look at human physiology and anatomy. The proof is simply there from looking at our bodies to see what we are intended to eat, not what we "can" eat.