Is a vegan diet unnatural?

Created on: February 24, 2026
Last edited on: February 24, 2026

This is one of the most common arguments against a vegan diet - in discussions, comment sections, and family conversations. We provide you with an objective assessment.

What does “unnatural” mean?

Commonly, “unnatural” means that something does not occur in nature. In addition, the term is culturally and socially shaped, as many people view nature as something inherently good. This is known as the so-called naturalistic fallacy.

It is often assumed that a vegan diet is unnatural and therefore bad - and that a mixed diet is natural and therefore good. Although this position (as we will see in the next section) cannot be defended upon closer examination, many people unconsciously hold on to it in order to avoid giving up habits and traditions.

Does natural automatically mean good or healthy?

This widespread pattern of thinking can be quickly challenged with a few examples:

• Supermarkets are unnatural.
• Hospitals are unnatural.
• Restaurants are unnatural.

→ Our entire modern life - including our diet - is to a large extent unnatural, and therefore not necessarily bad. At the same time, power struggles, diseases, and pain are natural, yet still regarded as negative.

Moreover, unnatural does not automatically mean unhealthy, and natural does not automatically mean healthy. Mold, poisonous mushrooms, and contaminated water are natural, yet still problematic. Naturalness is not a health argument. Health depends, among other things, on physical activity, nutrient intake, and the overall quality of the diet - and it can also be achieved when living vegan.

Are humans naturally meat-eaters?

From a purely biological perspective, humans can utilize a variety of foods - both plant-based and animal-based. Important: “can” does not mean “must”. Just because humans have “always” eaten meat and this is considered natural does not automatically make it good, right, or necessary.

Historically, people ate what was available in order to survive. Cooking was likely a key evolutionary advantage. A defining characteristic of humans is that we process food by cooking it before eating it. For this reason, the term Cucinivore (from the Latin coquere - “to cook") is attributed to us.

Today, we no longer live under Stone Age conditions. Particularly in the Western world, we have access to supermarkets and knowledge about nutrients. Major and well-established nutrition societies share the position that a well-planned vegan diet can be healthy and nutritionally adequate, provided that vitamin B12 is reliably supplemented. Not every vegan diet is automatically healthy - just as not every mixed diet is healthy.

→ Humans are not naturally pure meat-eaters, although meat was part of the diet of many of our ancestors. This fact can be acknowledged, but from an ethical perspective it does not have to be accepted as a justification for consuming meat and other animal products today.

Conclusion

The question of naturalness distracts from what actually matters. It is irrelevant whether a vegan diet is natural or unnatural. As we have learned, the term “natural” is ultimately irrelevant both in terms of health and ethical evaluation. The issue is not whether a vegan diet is natural, but whether it is FEASIBLE AND POSSIBLE.
From an objective standpoint, the conclusion is clear: scientifically speaking, humans are capable of following a fully plant-based diet. With this knowledge, we should ask ourselves how we can justify supporting slaughterhouses if we do not have to. This makes the debate less emotional - and significantly more precise.

➡️ Share our answer: