Im concerned..

[Dsalles]

It sounds like you're in Brazil, where as I'm commenting about North America. I really have no idea what people do in Brazil.

Yes I said I am in Brazil, which is the first or second largest exporter of beef in the world and the second largest producer, accounting for 15% of world production. Since you have no idea about what they do here, I will be glad to inform you. I can tell you it is terrible for the soil and for the native animals.

[cornivore]

The question was "Is there any research which shows that the vegan diet is actually healthier than the omnivorous diet?" The answer is yes, there are several examples (and I'm not going to list every study ever done); obviously the health problems of other diets are well publicized, in addition to those stating the benefits of plant based ones.

This again ignores my point, when you compare aggregates like dietary classes you will miss information about specific diets. But in this case nobody has shown that "vegan diets are healthier" as a class, studies that have looked at all-cause mortality in large diverse populations haven't found in any difference, for example:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4691673/

But as I said, even if studies consistently showed that "vegan diets" as a class had lower all-cause morality that wouldn't mean that every type of vegan diet is healthier than every type of omnivorous diet. In particular, its entirely possible that there is some specific omnivorous diet that is healthier than every type of vegan diet.

The notion is that they compare balanced diets, of whatever type, which you want to call a vague kind of class, and you're talking about unbalanced diets potentially being unhealthy, well duh (I've already said that too). They're not comparing aggregates, you're just throwing that in there, even though research mentions balanced diets specifically to do with veganism being healthier. Nobody's doing a study of individuals on a mono diet of each and every food that exists to see if it would be unbalanced, because they already know it would. Besides, there would be a million or so combinations to study based on your premise that we can't know anything about the topic unless we study every possible combination from here to eternity. The concept of a balanced diet is accepted as being much simpler, and may consist of various foods with the nutrients in common. So I don't think they've been missing that point in the research, which shows balanced plant-based diets to be healthier than other balanced diets (one is considered to be a healther balance, that's all).

[carnap]

The notion is that they compare balanced diets, of whatever type, which you want to call a vague kind of class, and you're talking about unbalanced diets potentially being unhealthy, well duh (I've already said that too).

They aren't just studying "balanced diets" or "healthy diets", they are looking at everyone that identifies within the dietary class.

And, yes, they are most certainly comparing dietary aggregates. "Vegetarian", "vegan", "omnivore" are very general classes of diets. There are studies on more specific eating matters, for example, the so called Mediterranean diet but nobody has conducted studies on specific vegetarian or vegan eating matters. In any case, I'm not going to keep repeating myself.