[yreg]

Sorry, I can't answer that as a yes/no since there is a whole package of connotation with such statement that I don't necessarily agree with in either case.

I thought my argument was clear, but I can try to make it more clear:

- I eat pork. Unfortunately because of people like me there are many many suffering pigs.

- I believe that it is more justified to make a pig suffer for neuroscience research than to be made into a McRoyal. (Let's assume that the suffering is comparable. Please also assume that the suffering is necessary for the particular research and that research has actual potential for useful applications. If there is evidence of unnecessary abuse then I'm not defending such abuse.)

- Therefore it seems silly to me to attack neuroscience researchers instead of me, an omnivore who could be vegetarian/vegan.

I understand that one can argue for both positions at the same time -- argue against research on animals and argue against eating meat. But I think the latter one is much more important than the former. And yet you probably wouldn't attack me for my meat-eating habit. (Maybe because doing so would be impolite.)