I'm not a vegan but I haven't eaten meat or poultry for over 20 years, strictly for ethical reasons.

I’m aware of that. Some in the vegan community would not agree with those classifications just because they show up on Wikipedia. But then again I don’t have the “i’m more vegan than you” attitude so whatever works for someone that ends up saving animals and the planet in some way I’m all for it. However, I’ve seen vegans argue that those who are only “vegan” dietarily are plant based and not vegan at all.

@graceylou A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

@graceylou and you are more knowledgeable than Wikipedia? look up megalomaniac.

@BettyColeman Did I ever say that? I’m saying that I’ve met some vegans who would not follow those terminologies as defined by Wikipedia. That said, Wikipedia is just as reliable as any random things you find on the internet. Many entries are lacking cited sources and some are behind in being up to date. It’s nowhere near a peer reviewed scientific journal.

May be you should read exactly what I say rather than react to what you think I could possibly have said. I understand people have different interpretations of what veganism means to them. They don’t need Wikipedia to define it for them. The decision to become a vegan is very personal. I want to keep this discussion non-confrontational and everyone’s comment about the topic is valid.

Wikipedia is wrong. This is the definition of veganism:"a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals." Note it says ALL forms of exploitation of and cruelty to animals for food, clothing or ANY OTHER PURPOSE. You are not vegan unless you embrace and live by this philosophy. It is not a diet, it is not about your health, it is not about the environment, it is about the animals. People who eat a plant based diet for their health or to reduce their environmental footprint are not by definition vegan. They eat a plant-based diet but are not living the philosophy.

@FitVeganDancer I realize I'm not going to change your belief. But, perhaps you'd like my perspective. If not, don't read any further. Philosophers tend to agree there is no absolute right and wrong. By your definition, cats are wrong to eat meat. So, I'm not buying that you know that the Wikipedia definitions of veganism are wrong. That is your moral judgment. I am not religious and believe in ethics. People, cats, and prey animals are part of nature, and do what is necessary to survive. As far as we know, only people judge things a moral or ethical.

So, eating only vegetables is good for people's health, good for the environment, good for individual species, and good for animals that aren't killed for commerce. The intent of the person who does not use animal products does not change any of the reasons it is good to eat only vegetables.

No one gave you the power to control my thoughts, or anyone else. You are not the authority on English word definitions. In fact, there is no such authority; definitions change all the time because dictionaries try to follow common use. So, you and a few "true vegans" want to monopolize a word. I think you have already failed.

Donald Watson and the Vegan Society coined the word in 1944. At that time they didn't know of vegan health benefits nor environmental benefits, so they made the only case for being vegan they could, it is cruel to kill animals.

If Mr. Watson had know of the health and environmental benefits, do you really think he would have ignored them when making the case for vegan living?

I think your position about the definition of vegan is very weak.

@graceylou My idea veganism includes not killing animals or being unkind to them, health and environmental. I am an animal lover, doen't even spray insecticides. I relocate wasp nests, instead of killing them. However, this group's definition of vegan is only limited to people with the intention of being humane, then perhaps I should leave the group, because I think improving people's health and the health of the entire environment is significantly more important than being humane to animals.

Shall I go or stay, you decide.

@EdEarl To me, it looks like this group has members with various interpretations of veganism. It’s not even a strictly vegan group; it’s also a vegetarian group. There are those who think only their interpretation matters and should override others’. They have the right to interpret it their way yes, but you have the right to interpret it your way. We all have the final effect of reducing consumption and use of animals whatever our reasons. I hate the attitude of “I’m more vegan than you”. Whatever we do makes a difference. None of us is a perfect vegan. There’s no such thing. We just try to do what we can. If you decide to leave then your voice will not be heard. Anyhow, it seems to me that people who became vegan for dietary reasons end up learning more about the meat and dairy industries and start to make changes in other aspects of their lives. So it’s looks like a gateway to a more multi-faceted veganism. That was really what I was curious about.

@graceylou Thank you. I only offered because I was beginning to think the group was only for ethical vegans. I've not been vegan long, and didn't know that division of vegans even existed. My Dr. said become vegan and pointed me to the books by Dr. John A. McDougall. Later I saw "Forks over Knives" on youtube and Netflix. I ended up on Agnostic and joined. This Q, Vegan for health, occurred, and I answered. Little did I know it would stir a hornets nest. I'll stay in the group, but if people think I'll tell people, "I eat a plant based diet," when asked about my diet, they are nuts. I'm vegan.

@EdEarl It's not about the name, it's about what you do, right? We all start somewhere. I asked the question because I think lately people are becoming more aware of the health benefits of eating a "vegan diet" if done in a certain way and more and more people are becoming "vegan" for this reason. There is a bit of backlash I think from people who have been vegan for years. Most people don't care if you want to call yourself vegan or plant-based or whatever else, as long as you're doing something in the right direction. Some people would tell you you can't call yourself vegan, only plant-based if it's only about your diet. Honestly, we don't want to push away people who are making a start into the lifestyle. And I'm not the creator of this group so I have no say in whether people stay or leave or what they can or cannot say. I for one am glad you are here. I think I'm just going to go back and just post recipes.

@BettyColeman

megalomania (countable and uncountable, plural megalomanias)

A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.
An obsolete name for narcissistic personality disorder.
An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.

I don't think we are delusional. Why do you think it applies?

@EdEarl and others, please understand that what I am saying about the meaning of vegan is not to criticize you or anyone else. It is not to say I am better than you, or more moral than you. I am not saying if you don't agree with what I am saying you can't be in this group or that we can't get along. This is no different than a discussion about what is an atheist verses an agnostic. As CNN says calling an apple a banana does not make it a banana. Even if a lot of people call it a banana that does not make it a banana. A banana is not better or worse than an apple and they are both fruits but they are different.
When I said Wikipedia was wrong, it was not a moral judgement, it was a statement of fact. Mr. Watson and the vegan society defined it they way they did because their motivation was not harming animals. Veganism has always been about not harming animals. It is not just about eating them, it is about not exploiting them for any reason. The reason you can't be vegan for your own health is because your health has nothing to do with exploiting animals for clothing, entertainment or research. In fact you could argue that using animals for medical research is good for your health but not for the animals. You can't be vegan for the environment, because again you would have no issues using animals for entertainment like rodeo or horse racing or circuses. If you don't eat animals for your own health or the environment, that helps animals but it is not being vegan. You can also eat small amounts of animal product without harming your health but you can't do it without harming the animals. You can exploit animals to help the environment but that is not good for the animals. Vegan is about not harming the animals. I can be a junk food vegan. Eating a plant based diet for your health is not an ethical decision it is a personal health choice. Veganism is not about cats in the wild eating other animals. Wild animals don't make moral choices, they do what they are genetically programmed to do. I am not saying being vegan is right or wrong, but I am defining what it is. You are free to make your own moral choices just don't say you are vegan if you are not. Veganism is not a diet, a plant-based diet is one part of being vegan but only one piece. Vegetarian is a diet, vegan is not. You can be vegetarian for your health or the environment or the animals but not vegan. The reason they came up with the word vegan was to differentiate it from vegetarians who still harm animals. A plant based diet can be good for your health, and the environment and the animals, but it is not being vegan. Not going to church does not make me an atheist. Not being religious does not make me an atheist. If I believe in some kind of higher power, I am not an atheist. Words have meaning, and vegan has a meaning. If I eat a plant based diet, but purchase leather shoes or go to the rodeo or think it's okay to test cosmetics on animals then I am not a vegan. If you don't believe in and don't do your best to follow the vegan philosophy then don't call yourself a vegan. if it make you happy you can say you eat a vegan diet, but that does not make you a vegan. I am not saying you can't be in this group, I am not even making a judgement about your ethics. There are vegans who care about their health and vegans who care about the environment, but there are no dietary vegans, or environmental vegan, or even ethical vegans, there are no divisions of veganism there is vegan and not vegan. You can be vegan without caring about your health or the environment but you can't be vegan without caring about the animals. The fact that people misuse the word does not change what it is. I respect that not everyone will agree with what I have said and that is okay.Whatever you do that reduces your harm to the environment or reduces harm to animals or that improves your health is a good thing. Best wishes to you all. Peace

@FitVeganDancer You have stated your position again. There is no reason to reiterate my position. Best wishes and peace.