Preface
Briefing description and more.
A very short description of no more than one or two sentences.
Companion Videos
Briefing Meta
Counts:
| Main Text | |
| Key Points | 0 |
| Counterclaims | 0 |
| Supplementary | 0 |
| Further Study | 0 |
| Footnotes | 0 |
| Media & Advocacy | |
| Advocacy Notes | 0 |
| —Socratic Questions | 0 |
| Flashcards | 0 |
| Presentation Slides | 0 |
| Memes & Infographics | 0 |
| Companion Videos | 0 |
Activity Log:
Key Points Links
Loading…
Help Us Improve
Please send your suggestions for improvements, or report any issues with this briefing to [email protected]
We appreciate that you are taking the time to help us improve. All suggestions and reports will be carefully considered.
Summary
A concise summary of the briefing (see below for citations).
This is the summary. Paragraphs appear with square bullets.
Context
Places this topic in its larger context.
This is the context.
Key Points
This section provides talking points.
Veganism makes no claim of perfection, but non‑vegans are responsible for the deaths of the animals they eat, and for the harvesting deaths caused by growing the large volumes of feed those animals require.
Over 75% of the world’s grains and soy used for food are fed to animals.1
Eating animal products instead of eating crops creates a multiplier effect: each calorie of meat, dairy, or eggs requires many more calories of harvested plant crops, contributing to more incidental animal deaths.
- On average, it takes 24 calories of harvested crops to produce just one calorie of animal-based food for humans (World Resources Institute, “Creating a Sustainable Food Future”).2
Animal agriculture is so inefficient because most of the feed calories consumed by an animal go toward energy for daily living. Also, some energy is expended to produce body parts that are not consumed (Applied Animal Nutrition Journal, “Energy Requirements of Livestock”).3
The “crop deaths” argument relies on studies that are poorly executed or misrepresented.
On an episode of the Joe Rogan podcast, Chris Kresser mentioned4 the 2018 research paper5 “Field Deaths in Plant Agriculture” by Bob Fischer and Andy Lamey to support the claim that approximately 7.3 billion animals are killed annually by plant agriculture in the United States.
However, rather than supporting Kresser’s claim, the paper questioned earlier research by Steven Davis and Michael Archer that supports that number. The authors say that the 7.3 billion number is “clearly too high” and rests on “dubious assumptions,” “absence of evidence,” and “calculation errors.”6
Even if the 7.3 billion number was accurate, more than that number of land animals are slaughtered annually for food in the United States. If you include fish in the equation, well over 55 billion are killed annually in the United States.7
Counterclaims
Responses to some yes but retorts.
Claim: Grazed animals don’t require feed, so no animals are killed in harvesting.
To whatever extent grazing reduces the amount of feed used, that doesn’t change the reality that over 75% of the world’s grains and soy used for food are fed to animals,8as mentioned above.
We simply don’t have enough land—the United States has enough pasture to support only 27% of the current beef production (Environmental Research Letters 2018).9
Grazed animals are often moved to a feedlot to be fed grains for 4 to 6 months of their 18-month (Food Transparency Project, 2020)10 existence before being slaughtered (The North American Meat Institute, 2015).11
- Livestock is particularly inefficient at converting feed calories to meat. If you average across the most used farmed animals, it takes 24 calories of harvested crops to produce just one calorie of animal-based food for humans. But for beef, the figure is 100—it takes 100 calories of harvested crops to produce just one calorie of beef. (World Resources Institute, “Creating a Sustainable Food Future”)12
Grazing contributes to habitat loss, as discussed in a key point above.
Supplementary Info
Additional information that may prove useful.
New farming methods (like no-till,13 veganic,14 and regenerative plant-based agriculture15) are being developed to reduce even unintentional wildlife harm.
Veganism doesn’t claim to eliminate all harm—it seeks to minimize suffering as much as possible and reject deliberate violence where it is avoidable.
Further Study
Sources providing a deeper understanding of the topic or related topics.
Other Resources
Ed Winters, “Debunked: Do Vegans Kill More Animals Through Crop Deaths?“, reinforces the points made here while offering a deeper dive into the weaknesses of the research behind the objection.
This Sentient video, “Do Vegans Kill More Animals Than Meat Eaters? Debunking the Crop Death Argument,” breaks down the crop‑death claim with journalistic rigor, unpacking the core of the argument and showing why it doesn’t hold up in evidence or logic.
This Debug the Brain video, “Vegan vs Carnivore: Who Kills More Animals?“, complements this briefing more directly by expounding on the counterclaim mentioned above that “grazed animals don’t require feed, so no animals are killed in harvesting.”
Advocacy Resources
Information to help with outreach and advocacy.
Share This Briefing
Cloned from the Preface Section on page load.
Companion Videos
Cloned from the Preface Section on page load.
Additional Visuals
How to use Additional Visuals
Feel free to share these visuals on social media or anywhere they might prove useful.
Click on an image to get an enlarged view, then right-click to save or copy to the clipboard. From an enlarged view, click on the ‘X’ in the upper right corner to exit the enlarged view and return to the visuals gallery.
Visuals Gallery
Presentation Slides
Click the link to view and optionally download the companion PowerPoint Slides for this briefing:
How to Use the Presentation Slides
Feel free to use and customize these slides for your own presentations. You can also mix this deck with slides from other briefings to build a custom presentation.
After clicking on the share link , you can view the slides and speaker notes. You can also download the PowerPoint file for editing and customization—just look for the download link. If you have a Microsoft account with OneDrive access, you can also save the slides to your personal onedrive.
Flash Cards
We partner with Brainscape for its excellent learning features. You will need to create a free Brainscape account to study the cards.
Go to Flash Cards: This will take you to a list of decks.
About Flash Cards and Brainscape
Flash cards are here to help you commit important facts and concepts in this briefing to memory.
In Brainscape, there is one deck for each briefing. You can study more than one deck at a time. Brainscape uses spaced repetition to promote memory retention. It is “the secret to learning more while studying less.”
You can study using your browser, but Brainscape also has a free mobile app that makes learning anywhere easy.
Socratic Questions
Socratic-style questions are embedded in the Advocacy Notes below, and shown in italics.
These are open-ended, thought-provoking questions designed to encourage critical thinking, self-reflection, and deeper understanding. They are inspired by the Socratic method, a teaching technique attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates, who would ask his students probing questions rather than directly providing answers.
The goal is to help people examine their beliefs, clarify their thoughts, uncover assumptions, and explore the evidence and reasoning behind their ideas.
Advocacy Notes
Ted Nugent on the Joe Rogan Podcast
In addition to the claims made on the Joe Rogan podcast mentioned above, similar claims were made on another episode of the podcast, this time featuring Ted Nugent.
In this case, they were presented without any supporting evidence—yet Rogan responded by saying, “That’s a really good point, and it’s a point that a lot of people ignore.”16
Tips for Advocacy and Outreach
Segue the Conversation Back to Animal Ethics
- “Even if incidental deaths occur during plant harvesting, how does that justify our intentional breeding, abuse, and violent slaughter of billions of farmed animals each year—animals who, incidentally, eat even more harvested crops?”
Why? This keeps the focus on the key difference between unintentional harm and purposeful exploitation, clarifying the ethical issue.
Focus on the Bigger Picture of Harm
- “If the goal is to cause the least harm, doesn’t it make sense to remove ourselves from the systems that cause the most suffering?“
Why? This clarifies that the ethical standard should be to reduce avoidable, large-scale suffering, not justify more of it.
Expose the Double Standard
- “How can someone criticize veganism for accidental deaths while continuing to support an industry that causes intentional suffering and killing on a massive scale?“
Why? This exposes the double standard and highlights the hypocrisy of using crop deaths as a moral objection.
Flip the Logic Back on the Argument
- “If plant agriculture causes some deaths, wouldn’t reducing the number of animals we farm—who eat enormous amounts of crops—reduce both farm animal suffering and crop deaths?“
Why? This flips the argument on its head, showing that veganism actually reduces overall harm.
Test Their Consistency
- “If you’re using crop deaths as a reason not to be vegan, does that mean you think causing fewer deaths is better—or not?“
Why? This encourages the person to examine whether their argument is grounded in genuine concern or just deflection.
Widen the Circle of Concern
- “Wouldn’t it be more consistent to care about all animal deaths—especially the ones we can directly control?“
Why? This reinforces the idea that moral concern should include farmed animals and not just incidental wildlife deaths.
Challenge the Justification
- “Do you think it makes sense to use one type of harm to justify a much larger and more deliberate form of harm?“
Why? This draws attention to the flawed logic behind the “vegans kill more” argument.
Encourage Moral Reflection
- “What does it say about our moral compass if we use the idea of some unintentional deaths to excuse billions of deliberate ones?“
Why? This invites reflection on personal accountability and ethical integrity.
Point Out Who’s Really Responsible for More Deaths
- “If vegans were responsible for every incidental death caused by crop harvesting, wouldn’t meat eaters be responsible for those plus the deaths of the animals they consume?“
Why? This exposes the logical failure of trying to blame vegans more than omnivores.
Acknowledge Avoidance and Redirect
- “Why do you think it’s easier for people to bring up incidental deaths rather than face the reality of how animals are treated in farms and slaughterhouses?“
Why? This opens space for discussing emotional avoidance and the real reasons people resist change.
Footnotes
Our sources, with links back to where they are used.