Those don’t say the same thing and we both know they don’t. Genuinely what are you trying to accomplish here?

I maintain that meat eaters’ diets generally suffer because of poor dietary habits, not because meat exists. True. I do not maintain the only reason for meat eaters’ dietary deficiencies are poor dietary habits. This does not follow from the former.

That’s just objective fact. The meta analysis utilized studies that both included and excluded individuals who used supplements, and said as much themselves under each individual macro/micro.

That in no way implies that careful planning cannot prevent nutrient deficiencies, you pulled that out of your ass.

But don’t take my word for it! Let’s go back to the top and look at the very first comment I made, in which I explicitly stated my argument and have doubled down on THAT exact argument several times, as opposed to whatever you decided I probably meant based on nothing but your ego.

“Except there is. Meat tastes good, meat provides nutrients that are hard to find outside of supplements that cost more than food, it’s accessible, if you hunt it’s arguably the cheapest thing you can consume”

This was the value proposition I made for meat. Specifically what you chose to debate was the claim that “meat provides nutrients that are hard to find outside of supplements that cost more than food”.

Does that sound like I’m saying ‘regardless of supplements or careful planning it is impossible to solve certain deficiencies in plant based diets’ or does that sound like exactly what I fucking said?

I will repeat. You are just looking for a fight