I am sure you've received comments in response to the column about vegetarianism, so I have little interest in adding to the pile. But I do feel I have to respond to two major fallacies in your piece. Your point about the feasibility of growing enough food for people to eat just plants -- I have to assume you missed out on some math and biology thus far in your college education because the basic equation we are dealing with here is simple and quite well understood already. You must know that it takes considerably more plants to feed animals who in turn we eat than it ever could to simply consume those plants directly -- this is why the United Nations has confirmed that a switch from meat to vegan diet will have a much greater impact on your overall energy consumption than switching from a SUV to a Prius (if you don't read the news see the UN report Livestock's Long Shadow). As far as our human requirement for eating meat, perhaps you missed out on how people are likely to eat outside of America, but I can assure you that many nations and people exist without animal products (not for reasons of ethics necessarily) and experience better nutritional health than Americans -- such as India. I realize yours was just an opinion piece, but without really researching or critically analyzing your topic you are really just embarrassing yourself and your place of education.