As vegans, it is expected that people who aren’t vegans will compare their physical presence to yours in hope to verify which diet is better. While a general comparison is fairly justifiable, the notion of trying to evaluate this assessment on an isolated individual bases is invalid.
A comparison is a competition and it is only justified when the contenders are given an equal start, with equal privileges and likewise, equal expectations. However, when a competition is not justified, not only will you create confusion for yourself but for others and for anyone who is subjected to such premature judgment.
The experience and obstacles faced between individuals are often too extreme to do an unbiased analysis. The impact of the natural diet (vegan) can only be truly measured according to each individual’s personal progressive experience over time. Your progression is only relative to your own personal journey, not in reference to someone else’s. The comparison has to be made between the time before your dietary transition and the time thereafter.
For example, a meat eater who has been handed down healthy genes from their parents will more likely appear to be in a better shape than a vegan whose parents were severe drug addicts. Now, if anyone was to use the health status of these two individuals without the context of their unique experience, meat eating would be considered the appropriate diet.As opposed to doing cross comparison between individuals, compare the past of that vegan to where he/she is right now and only then will you come to an accurate conclusion. Let me also add, that if the person who is a meat eater was to become a vegan, they would have been in an even much better condition.