> In other words, from the advocacy group’s perspective, health can be an effective “foot in the door” approach to increasing the number of vegetarians and vegans, but often not enough to keep people animal-free for the long-term.
Not even their own health is a big enough factor for them to control their lust.
> “The latest findings once again show that a message focused on reduction instead of elimination of animal products may be more effective to create an overall decline in animal product consumption,” the report says. “Advocates would be well advised to soften their appeals to avoid suggesting the choice is all or nothing.”
I wonder if those vegetarians/vegans that returned to eating animal products returned 100%, or in a reduced manner. That's the really interesting bit unfortunately missing from the article. If people reduce their animal products usage with, say, 50% vs someone going vegan for a few months and then returns to animal products with a 50% reduction, they will ultimately have had a bigger impact than people "only" doing the reduction. Personally, all the vegetarians/vegans I know that have gone back have done it because it was too hard in social settings, but the experience have resulted in them reducing their use of animal products to "rarely" or "at social occasions" or "when it's not hard to skip on it", and that's a pretty big reduction.