A woman in my ward recently posted a request for recipes on her personal blog. This woman is an avid cook, and already has more recipes than most. The reason she put out this request was because she had decided to take a more active role in reducing the amount of meat in her diet. One reason she cited was the phrase from D&C 89 that says to eat meat sparingly.

She never said that she was attempting vegetarianism, let alone veganism. All she said was that she wanted to reduce the amount of meat in her diet, and so wanted more recipes that had little to meat in them.  This declaration didn't seem at all unusual to me, and is even something I have considered doing myself. I was taken aback when the first comment on her post expressed deep concern about my friend's motivations for doing something so drastic. A later post intimated other friends and family members had expressed similar sentiments to my friend in person.

Now, I can think of several reasons why a reduced meat diet is a good idea. First, as I mentioned earlier, there is the notion that we should eat meat sparingly. I personally feel that eating meat with every meal (or even nearly every meal) doesn't count as 'sparingly.' I also think that building your meals and diet around meat is not strictly compatible with the idea of eating meat sparingly.

Another good reason to reduce the amount of meat is for budgetary reasons. Meat is expensive. Unless you are eating the very cheapest, 'near meat' products, reducing the meat in your diet will probably cost you less money. Even something as simple as reducing the serving size can be incredibly effective. A serving of steak is supposed to be about the size of a deck of cards. Every steak I've ever eaten has been at least three times that size. With that mindset one 'steak' can serve me, my husband and my toddler.

Expense is also where the idea of building your diet around meat comes into play. When one is used to constructing a meal around a meat product it can be difficult to figure out what to eat when meat is removed from the meal. Many people resort to buying expensive replacement meats, such as veggie burgers and tofurky. Shifting focus away from meat counteracts this trend.

Another reason is the humanitarian/environmental reasons. The way most meat is produced is not environmentally sound, nor humane for the animals. I grew up around animals that would be killed for eating, so I'm not too bothered by the idea of killing and eating that adorable little chicken, cow, pig, or whatever.  However, because I grew up with animals that would be killed for eating I understand that, while that chicken's days may be numbered, it deserves clean humane conditions while it is alive. Also, most factory farms abuse antibiotics, and are major polluters. It isn't a industrial model I feel good about supporting. So the meat I do feel good about buying, tends to be the most expensive, which provides further benefit for reducing the amount I eat.

The best argument against a meat-free diet is the nutrition angle. Meat is one of the best sources of protein out there. And, if I understand correctly, it is extremely difficult to get all of the different types of protiens humans need from vegetables alone. By that same token nutrition is another great argument for a reduced meat diet. Meat is high in fat and cholesterol. Using meat as a supplementary source of protein, rather than a primary source of protein is, by all accounts, just plain better for you.

With all of these reasons, I have a really hard time believing that a reduced meat diet is anywhere close to 'extreme.' (It is certainly much less extreme than the Atkins diet, for one.)  I will concede that veganism is extreme (and should not be undertaken lightly), and vegetarianism can be borderline extreme (depending on how strict, and how severe one chooses to be).  But I can't see a reduced meat diet as anything other than a reasonable dietary option. So I find myself struggling to understand where my friend's concerned acquaintances are coming from.