While I do think it's important for people to become more conscious of the impact of their food/fashion/product choices (on their physical and emotional well-being, other beings, society and the environment), I don't think the way to do it is by reading this book. My five reasons for this are:
1. Black and white picture of the world:
The author presents an incredibly simplistic view of the world, all its problems and humanity (who are clearly defined in terms of either vegan or non-vegan).
“Our cultural predicament – the array of seemingly intractable problems that beset us, such as chronic war, terrorism, genocide, starvation, the proliferation of disease, environmental degradation, species extinction, animal abuse, consumerism, drug addiction, alienation, stress, racism, oppression of women, child abuse, corporate exploitation, materialism, poverty, injustice, and social malaise- is rooted in an essential cause that is so obvious that it has managed to remain almost completely overlooked […] until we are willing to make the connections between what we are eating and what was required to get it on our plate, and how it affects us to buy, serve and eat it, we will be unable to make the connections that will allow us to live wisely and harmoniously on this earth.” (page xv, preface).
In the author's opinion, ALL the world's problems are caused by the consumption of animal products, and can therefore be fixed by simply stopping the practice. Undoubtedly, many of the world's issues are interconnected and dependent upon each other, but correlation does not imply causation and there can't just be 1 fix for everything. That being said, there actually are many issues that “veganism” can (and does) have a positive effect on, it's just a pity that the author chose to create an idealistic, grandiose and naive image of it.
2. Preaching to the converted:
One would assume that this book was written to convert people to the vegan lifestyle (not just a “plant based” diet), and yet the evangelical tone, slated resources and new-agey yet aggressive and confrontational language, in my opinion, is enough to turn many people away from it and to further isolate the movement. By preaching to the converted, the author perpetuates the creation of self-congratulating social bubbles that so many vegans seem to create for themselves (behaviour that is not by any means exclusive to vegans, and in my opinion, never serves to truly further any meaningful cause).
3. Us-versus-them mentality:
You're either with us or against us – this comes across as the author's “vegan” message. There are countless parts of the book that either imply or outwardly suggest that:
a) Non-vegans are slaves to their cultural/social backgrounds while vegans are never subject to indoctrination/brainwashing and are immune to the impulses that drive non-vegans towards consumerist culture, etc. An example:
“Veganism is still exceedingly rare even among people who consider themselves spiritual aspirants because the forces of early social conditioning are so difficult to transform.” (page 28)
As if that is the only reason why someone would choose not to be vegan.
b) There's no such thing as a “former vegan”. For example:
“We [vegans] never 'cheat,' because that means directly harming others, which we are unwilling to do. While there are thus many 'former vegetarians,' it's unlikely that 'former vegans' were ever actually vegans; it seems doubtful that compassion authentically obtained is ever lost.” (page 94)
This, in my opinion, reinforces veganism's cult-like image.
c) Non-vegans are evil menaces to society. For example, while the author acknowledges that many slaughterhouse workers only work at these places out of necessity, he then goes on to say:
“How do people who spend their days [in slaughterhouses] […] treat their girlfriends, spouses, and children?” (page 173).
Readers are encouraged to both sympathise with slaughterhouse workers (who presumably simply don't know any better) and at the same time to consider them as evil beings who are incapable of compassion and who therefore make terrible spouses, friends and parents.
d) People are naturally “good” and eating meat makes them “bad”.
“In order to confine and kill animals for food, we must repress our natural compassion […] We are called to allow our innate mercy and kindness to shine forth and to confront the indoctrinated assumptions that promote cruelty.” (page xvii, preface)
I guess the author sides with Rousseau in the Hobbes (people are naturally bad but are civilised by society) vs. Rousseau (people are naturally good but are corrupted by society) argument on the essence of human nature, but doesn't even think it's worth justifying his opinion to the reader – he presents his opinion as a given fact that the reader is expected to take for granted.
4. Promotion of pseudoscience:
Even though there were references to interesting research and several different studies, it was impossible for me to trust any interpretations of the works provided by the author with paragraphs such as the ones below filling up a good majority of the book:
From a section titled “Eating Vibrations” (page 135) - “Animal foods concentrate both physical and metaphysical toxins […] Metaphysical toxins – i.e., the concentrated vibrations of terror, grief, frustration, and desperation permeating these foods- are invisible and completely unrecognized by conventional science, yet they may be even more disturbing to us than physical toxins because they work on the level of feelings and consciousness, which are more essential dimensions of ourselves than our physical vehicle.” (page 137)
I would hope that most people who decide to stop consuming animal products don't do so because they're afraid of the “metaphysical toxins.” Unfortunately, a non-vegan reader could be left with the impression that this is what vegans are really afraid of.
5. New-agey psychoanalysis of meat eaters:
For example:
“What is so simple as eating an apple? […] When we eat an apple we are not just eating an apple as a separate thing […] We humans, eating apples, are in a true sense apples eating apples.” (page 5)
“It seems we cannot bear the thought of growing up and leaving home. Perhaps we long for infancy and the peaceful oblivion of our mother's breast, and if hers isn't available, then we'll use the breast of any lactating mother, even if she's a cow.” (page 110)
“The devil is ironically represented as having the horns and hooves of a goat or cow […] This evil or devil is certainly, on one level at least, the projection of our own shadow – the guilt, shame and unexpressed grief we bear for the massive ongoing cruelty we engage in as eaters of animals.” (page 162)
I have to say, I should have taken a cue from the book title; it does have the words “spiritual health” in it.
As if the other negative aspects of this book weren't enough, the author really tries to drive his point home by repeating it hundreds of times within the 293 page book. The main points are repeated several times within each chapter as though the author expects the reader to not only have a very short concentration span, but to also suffer from short term memory loss.