Clark 1

Kamryn Clark

Professor Leonard

English Composition 2

30 April 2021

How does the mindset of vegetarians compare to non-vegetarians?

Many individuals around the world choose to become vegetarian. Their motives often

differ, though, with many being for health, animal rights, or environmental reasons (Hopwood et

al.). With many reasons to become vegetarian, what keeps non-vegetarians from pursuing this

diet, and how does the mindset of non-vegetarians regarding health, animal rights, and the

environment compare to the mindset of those that are vegetarian?

The plant-based food sector is rising, with many stores and restaurants offering

vegetarian options. Lisa Kramer, a professor of finance at the University of Toronto, focuses on

the economical aspects of vegetarian eating in her article “The Future of Meat is Shifting to

Plant-Based Products.” With the purpose of informing individuals about the rise of the plant-

based food sector in Canada, Kramer mentions how the new Canada Food Guide “highlights the

nutritional benefits of protein sources like nuts, beans, legumes, pulses, and tofu,” (Kramer). She

also talks about financial statistics to further her point of this rise of the plant-based food sector,

mentioning how “plant-based meat company Beyond Meat recently saw its stock price surge

almost 40 per cent,” with many restaurants now offering Beyond Meat as a vegetarian alternative

to beef burgers (Kramer).

In a study conducted by Filippi et al., the researchers concluded that vegetarians have a

higher engagement of empathy related areas in the brain, as opposed to omnivores. In order to

determine how the brain functional networks differed between vegetarians and omnivores, the
 Clark 2

researchers designed an approved study, giving subjects an unbiased Empathy Quotient

questionnaire and obtaining brain MRI scans of each subject while viewing negative valence

scenes of human, negative valence scenes of animals, or neutral landscapes. They aimed to

inform the scientific community on the differences between brain functional networks in

vegetarians and omnivores, concluding that “the EQ score was significantly higher in vegetarians

in comparison with omnivore subjects” and that vegetarians have a “higher engagement of

empathy related areas while observing negative scenes regarding animals rather than humans”

(Filippi et al.).

Factory farms provide numerous examples of how eating meat can be harmful; examples

relating to animal rights, the environment, and human health. In the Encyclopedia of

Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, Bernard Rollin notes the effects of factory farms. This

industrialized farming leads to animal welfare issues, as the organisms present are confined to

crowded pens where diseases easily proliferate (Rollin). Resulting from this, antibiotics and

vaccines are used to control the spread of disease, but “such use of antibiotics . . . select[s] for

antibiotic-resistant pathogens,” putting human health at risk (Rollin). Also, in order to support

the thousands of animals present, factory farming “requires major inputs of energy, fossil fuel,

and water” (Rollin).

With the main non-religious motives for becoming vegetarian being health, the

environment, and animal rights, Hopwood et al. conducted a study evaluating how individuals

with differing motives respond to vegetarian advocacy materials. Through their unbiased study,

the researchers aimed to inform scientists and vegetarian advocates about the correlations

between individuals with differing motives and their responses to advocacy materials. They

found that individuals with the main motive of the environment or animal rights responded
 Clark 3

strongly to flyers targeting the environment or animal rights, respectively. They also concluded

that these individuals responded to health flyers as well, while people motivated by health didn’t

particularly respond to any vegetarian advocacy (Hopwood et al.).

Through this study, Hopwood et al. also aimed to inform the scientific community on any

behavioral or personality traits that correlate to specific motives for becoming vegetarian. Health

was the greatest factor motivating individuals, with this motive “[having] the broadest array of

correlates” (Hopwood et al.). The researchers also found that, generally, individuals who are

open to new experiences are motivated by the environment, while those involved in religious

organizations are motivated by animal rights (Hopwood et al.).

While many studies show that vegetarian diets are supported by better health in

individuals, it has also been shown that vegetarianism “is associated with an elevated prevalence

of mental disorders.” It’s also been reported that “vegetarians take more medication than non-

vegetarians,” and vegetarian individuals are at a higher risk for nutritional deficits (Buckert et

al.). According to a study by Buckert et al., aiming to inform scientists and individuals on the

health effects of vegetarianism, it’s unsure whether a vegetarian diet causes these poorer health

factors or if these factors cause the diet itself.

Also, red meat has proven to contain a variety of vital nutrients. According to Laura

Wyness, who studies dietetics, nutrition, and biological sciences, lean red meat provides many

beneficial micronutrients that individuals utilizing other diets may be lacking. Red meat contains

“the minerals magnesium, iron, potassium, and zinc,” and it also is rich in protein (Wyness).

Individuals commonly believe that all environmentalists who strongly care for animal

welfare and the environment are vegetarian, while, in reality, many environmentalists still eat

meat. In a study conducted by Scott et al., the researchers aimed to determine why
 Clark 4

environmentalists eat meat. Through their study, the researchers determined five main reasons as

to why environmentalists refrain from becoming vegetarian: they believe environmental

problems will be solved in the future; changing individual behavior won’t make a difference

unless the system changes as a whole; individual change matters, but it’s more complex than

simply stopping the consumption of meat; it makes sense to give up meat, but they don’t have

the willpower; eating meat is natural, necessary, normal, and enjoyable (Scott et al.).

It’s clear that the mindset of vegetarians differs from that of non-vegetarians. When

compared to non-vegetarians, not only do vegetarians have different opinions about the

environment, animal rights, and health effects of vegetarian diets, but they also have a stronger

empathetic response to negative images. How do these opinions and responses develop, though,

and what thoughts are strongest in causing individuals to become vegetarian?

 Clark 5

Works Cited

Burkert, Nathalie T., et al. "Nutrition and Health - The Association between Eating Behavior and

Various Health Parameters: A Matched Sample Study." PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 2, 2014, p.

e88278. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/A478820240/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=7661e746.

Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.

Filippi, Massimo, et al. "The Brain Functional Networks Associated to Human and Animal

Suffering Differ among Omnivores, Vegetarians and Vegans." PLoS ONE, vol. 5, no. 5,

2010, p. e10847. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/A473893296/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=165bffe8.

Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.

Hopwood, Christopher J., et al. “Health, Environmental, and Animal Rights Motives for

Vegetarian Eating.” PLoS ONE, vol. 15, no. 4, Apr. 2020, pp. 1–20. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0230609. Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.

Kramer, Lisa. "The future of meat is shifting to plant-based products." Gale Opposing

Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2021. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/BDJZOQ177453384/OVIC?

u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=01259524. Accessed 4 Mar. 2021. Originally published

as "The future of meat is shifting to plant-based products," The Conversation, 13 June

2019. Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.

Rollin, Bernard. "Factory Farms." Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, edited

by J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2009, pp.

421-423. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

 Clark 6

link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3234100131/OVIC?

u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=c08ab313. Accessed 8 Apr. 2021.

Scott, Evon, et al. "Why environmentalists eat meat." PLoS ONE, vol. 14, no. 7, 2019, p.

e0219607. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/A592987671/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=4134ec00. 

Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.

Wyness, Laura. “The Role of Red Meat in the Diet: Nutrition and Health Benefits.” Proceedings

of the Nutrition Society, vol. 75, no. 3, 2016, pp. 227–232.,

doi:10.1017/S0029665115004267. Accessed 29 Apr. 2021.