It's rather funny though. Perhaps they should watch the Disney movie The Lion King. Maybe they can learn something from King Mufasa:

Mufasa: Everything you see exists together, in a delicate balance. As king, you need to understand that balance, and respect all the creatures-- from the crawling ant to the leaping antelope.

Simba: But, Dad, don't we eat the antelope?

Mufasa: Yes, Simba, but let me explain. When we die, our bodies become the grass. And the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected in the great Circle of Life.

Basically animals die and they become the grass, or the tomato, or the lettuce, or the greenbeans, or the bananas, watermelons, apples, grains, rice, etc. I am curious to know how exactly does anyone avoid eating animals when animals become the soil in which all plants grown and get their nutrients which actually comes from dead animals as well.

A simple examination of man will reveal the truth in this matter. Binocular vision common amongst carnivores and omnivores, canine teeth and sharp incisors another commonality with non herbivores and the very fact that as you mentioned our digestive and nutrient gathering systems expect a meat diet to fulfill vital needs. Couple this with archaeological evidence showing that all ancient men used animal meat for food and animal skin for clothing and the only logical conclusion that you can make that humans were meant to use animal byproducts.

Two one-liners pop into my mind:  If God didn't want us to eat animals, why did he make them out of meat?

Vegetarian:  Old indian word for "poor hunter"...

Breastmilk is quite sufficient for many infants for the entire first year of life. The baby was obviously underweight and not well.  The problem is not inherently the diet of the infant or the mother but rather the parents' refusal to seek treatment to attempt to discover the cause of the infant's issues.

A vegan diet is not inherently unhealthy, nor is an exclusive diet of breastmilk for an infant unhealthy.  However, since the baby was ill and having growth issues, the parents should have sought medical assistance to determine the cause of the baby's illness and apparent malnutrition.  

It's a tragic situation.  

I have heard both - and both still make me smile!  Thanks for dredging up old memories.

It is a tragic situation, but you failed to read the entire article.  The cause of death was due to a lack of vitamins A and B12.  The lack of vitamin A is an issue that should have been taken care of by the parents.  However, he lack of B12 was due to the deficiency of the mother's diet.  The only source of B12 for a vegan is artificial ones, that until recently had been made from animal products.

A very good listing and resource.  Being a vegan is not bad as long as you understand the physiology of the diet - and what is necessary to live it.  My beef is with the groups that tout the diet without educating the adherents and thus are basically lying to the people.

There was clear negligence by the parents.  The child was ill and malnourished and not receiving appropriate treatment for her illness nor proper nutrition.  This is not a "vegans suck" or "stupid PETA" issue (the parents were French, after all, not American).  The parents were negligent in several areas.  Many exclusively vegan moms successfully and exclusively nurse their infants for their first year of life (breastmilk only) and those infants thrive.  The mom in this case should have known there was a nutrition issue based on her daughter's size and ill health.  She also should have pursued effective treatments for her daughter's illness when her own preferred treatments were not working.  

It is very sad that this infant died because of the negligence of her parents.  I just want to be clear that veganism itself nor delayed introduction of solids are problematic for most breastfeeding moms.  An exclusive diet of breastmilk is ideal for infants.  Generally a mother's milk is ideal even when a mom is malnourished (example:  in countries where access to clean water is limited, and food is scarce, babies are less likely to die when breastfed rather than formula fed even though mom herself may be receiving poor nutrition).

Some vegan moms prefer soy based formula for their infants because they believe human milk to be an "animal product" while other vegan moms believe that because she can give consent to share her milk with her infant (and human milk is not dairy), her breastmilk can be considered vegan.  

Moms who are malnourished due to poor diet (such as the mom from France) may be better off giving their babies soy formula if they are unwilling to make dietary adjustments to achieve proper nutrition (and this need not mean including meat or animal sources).  

Any number of health professionals should have been able to assist this family to perhaps avoid this child's death.  Both vitamin A and B12 are obtainable through vegan sources such as nutritional yeast (B12) and orange and green veggies (Vitamin A).  Mom may have been genuinely ignorant about deficiencies in her diet (which does not excuse her absolute negligence in seeking assistance with a child who was obviously NOT thriving) or she may have realized but have been too lazy to make changes (which is more than negligent, it is criminal).

What is really important to me in this discussion, is making it clear that vegan moms can breastfeed and that exclusively breastfeeding beyond a year is absolutely healthy for many babies.  The case in France is unusual and vegan moms should be encouraged to eat a broad, healthy diet including B12 supplementation but that for healthy vegan moms breastmilk remains the optimal form of nutrition for their infants.

I realize I am being repetitive, but I believe this is an important message (obviously not for the men on this thread, as I don't believe any of you are currently breastfeeding, , but for moms who may come across this thread in the future):  Breastmilk is the optimal food for babies.  Vegan moms can and should breastfeed.  Vegan moms should keep an eye on their diets and monitor their infant's growth and health (as should all moms).  Breastmilk can be complete nutrition for an infant all the way up to her first birthday.  If a vegan mom is unwilling to feed herself appropriately, she should place her infant on soy formula, however, this is not as good a choice as a proper diet for mom and breastfeeding.

I should have added as well that breastmilk is naturally high in Vitamin A in properly nourished mothers and the perfect source of it for infants.

In malnourished mothers, Vitamin A levels are often half of what they are in a well nourished mother, which would require improved diet and/or supplementation.  Infants may also receive vitamin supplements when needed, to include supplements of vitamin A (in the form of a multivitamin -- drops).

And Re:  vitamin B12, for vegetarians who consume fish, clams are very high in B12 (higher than most animal meats other than organ meat) and for vegan moms fortified cereals include B12 from animal sources.  I'm not vegan but I'd personally find that to be a tastier source than the nutritional yeast.

You think breastfeeding past 1 year is extreme?  I hope I am misunderstanding you.  

I don't think we disagree as much on this topic as it may seem.  I don't have a problem with vegan lifestyles -- it's not for me, but I don't think it is a perversion or inherently unhealthy.  It's certainly more challenging to maintain good nutrition on a vegan diet than on even a vegetarian diet but I think most of us could eat more nutritiously than we do anyway.

I do agree that it's extreme to choose not to feed a human infant human milk from his or her mother.  I personally think the reasoning behind that is wonky but so far I have not been selected to choose what other people can or cannot feed their kids.  

Re: nutritional yeast, it's a fungus (considered vegan) 

Although I am not happy about the impetus for your article (the baby's death), this is a very interesting topic and I am enjoying discussing it with you.

I just saw that I said fortified cereal includes B12 from animal sources.  That is a typo -- it should read non-animal sources.

Re: breastfeeding

I won't say too much on this topic without the go ahead from you Dr. Guy since it's a slight departure from your original topic (although if you are open to my sharing information relevant to what we've discussed in regards to breastfeeding, I am more than willing to do so) however, as Mason as said, the health organizations and medical professionals recommend breastfeeding a minimum of 1 year and continuing as long as mutually desired by mother and child (AAP).  WHO's recommendation is up to two years and beyond.  

Fact sheet on the benefits of breastfeeding beyond the first year of life:

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/bfextended/ebf-benefits.html

Infants have what is known as an "open gut" and breastmilk serves and immunological function, as the 50+ known antibodies coat the intestines.  During infancy the "open gut" allows intact macromolecules into the bloodstream (great for allowing antibodies from breastmilk IN), which means introducing cow's milk during this early time way create an allergic reaction (since the large proteins can pass into the bloodstream).

Additionally, cow's milk irritates the digestive tract and little ones who consume too much milk (cow's milk is not recommended during the first year, and should be limited to 2 cups thereafter) are at risk for issues with iron absorption and anemia.