The third survey of the Vegan Research Panel took place during May 2001. 1758 panel members were sent an email inviting them to complete an online survey comprising 12 questions. 58% of the panel completed the survey within an 18 day period.
"What a load of bullocks"
4 out of 5 UK vegans rated media coverage of veg*an issues during the
foot and mouth outbreak as poor. Overwhelming, the panel felt let down by the coverage of foot and mouth.
"Perhaps if the media gave as much coverage to everyday slaughter & poor care of animals the public would change their attitude to the meat industry."
"We are what we eat, what are you?"
Foot and mouth has provided a convincing argument for veganism. 14% of
UK vegans know someone who has become vegetarian or vegan because of foot
and mouth. Among those panel members who try to convert others to a veg*an
lifestyle, the figure rises to 20%.
"Food for thought"
The majority of vegans (83%) only occasionally try to convert other people,
but 6 out of 10 know someone who has become vegetarian or vegan because
of their influence.
The survey showed that 89% of vegans adopted their lifestyle for ethical/moral
reasons. 9% became vegan for dietary/health reasons, and 2% for spiritual/moral
reasons.
The figures below are based on the total panel responses (1023) unless otherwise stated.
| Very good | 1% |
| Good | 4% |
| Average | 21% |
| Poor | 37% |
| Very poor | 37% |
| Yes | 13% |
| No | 87% |
| Yes | 56% |
| No | 19% |
| Don't know | 25% |
| Never | 24% |
| Hardly ever | 25% |
| Sometimes | 37% |
| Often | 9% |
| Always | 5% |
| Dietary/health | 12% |
| Ethical/moral | 85% |
| Spiritual/religious | 3% |
| (Based on the responses of the 977 veg*an panel members.) | |
| Several times a day | 48% |
| Once a day | 22% |
| Several times a week | 23% |
| Once a week | 4% |
| Several times a month | 3% |
| Once a month | 0% |
| Less than once a month | 0% |
| Yes | 76% |
| No | 24% |
| 2001 | 1% |
| 2000 | 8% |
| 1999 | 17% |
| 1998 | 18% |
| 1997 | 14% |
| 1996 | 14% |
| 1995 or before | 28% |
| Male | 33% |
| Female | 67% |
| 16-24 | 29% |
| 25-34 | 37% |
| 35-44 | 22% |
| 45-54 | 9% |
| 55+ | 3% |
| "Hypocritical, superficial, sensationalist,
blinkered, what you would expect." "HUGELY biased towards the farmers. As a vegan, I resent subsidising them in the first place (via taxes) - and to have them complain further REALLY cuts." "No-one points out that death on a similar scale occurs every week in abattoirs." "Found footage of carcass piles appalling but hope people might realise what meat eating means." "All the coverage in my country New Zealand is focusing on the farmers affected, economic issues and the attempts to contain the disease. Nothing about the effects on the animals and their suffering. Pathetic." "Not enough discussion of the animal rights issues. I wrote to a paper but didn't get it published." "Too much sympathy for the farmers and not enough for the animals and the planet." "The whole thing is too disturbing for me to listen, watch, or read about." "Rather like war coverage - focussed on statistics and daily battles, etc. Less time for analysis and big picture." "Perhaps if the media gave as much coverage to everyday slaughter & poor care of animals the public would change their attitude to the meat industry." |
| This was an open-ended question. This is a selection of the responses of the 857 panel members who answered this question. |
| WHAT PRICE HUMAN GREED? SAVED FROM ABBATOIR HORROR! VEGETARIAN BARBECUES COST MUCH LESS ASH FOR CASH PASS THE PEAS PLEASE! A NATION OF ANIMAL LOVERS? SAME RESULT, DIFFERENT REASON YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT ISN'T THERE A MORE HUMANE WAY TO GET YOUR PROTEIN? WANT FRIES WITH THAT? A DYING INDUSTRY? SANITY FINALLY WINS AS COUNTRY GOES VEGAN |
| This was an open-ended question. This is a selection of the responses of the 746 panel members who answered this question. |