This is actually debatable. On the pro side of the argument, vegetarianism is more efficient because it takes less land mass, less energy and creates less carbon emissions to produce a pound of vegetables than to produce a pound of meat.
On the con side of the argument, vegetarianism is less efficient because the equivalent volume of vegetables has less caloric energy than the same volume of meat. Also, it is very difficult to get adequate amounts of all the essential amino acids from non-animal sources. Another argument against the energy efficiency of vegetarianism is that currently meat production is taking place on non-agricultural land, marginal land that is not fertile enough for plant production. If a large enough proportion of the human population stopped eating meat, there would not be enough food to go around because there is insufficient fertile farmland available to provide that much food.
Non-vegetarian...our ancestors lived on meat
Probably not, it comes from a human. But then, is milk vegetarian? It comes from a cow.
all the vegetables
No
Same as with any tool:reduce human labormake human labor more efficient and faster
Many pounds of vegetarian food is necessary to produce one pound of meat. Any energy used in food production is wasted if the food grown goes to livestock to produce meat. It is more energy efficient to eat vegetarian food directly.
None. No non-human animals are vegetarian. Vegetarianism is a lifestyle choice. Only humans make lifestyle choices. Only humans can be vegetarian.
Yes, and no. Yes if you are a vegetarian, if not than you are an omnivore.
the word is vegetarian
they eat human flesh
Sorry , I am not exactly sure what you mean. Please explain more.
Yes. For more vegetarian drinks, click on the related link below -