worse if you can't cook meat, it's also much more energy consuming and troublesome to digest it in many ways it's also slow to digest, so fruit sugar sources c

worse if you can't cook meat, it's also much more energy consuming and troublesome to digest it in many ways it's also slow to digest, so fruit sugar sources can be a good complement, but are less healthy but then most "fruit sugar sources" also had much less sugar in them before humans messed with them and more of other nutrients and there are stuff like shrooms, roots various plants etc. but also however we look at it, meat was a fundamental component, I mean without supplements or being able to take advantage of a huge variety of plants from all around the world being vegetarians is very likely to lead to some form of malnutrition. But also we have misgrown a lot of plants to be much way less nutrious and have access to a wide variety and access to supplements so it doesn't matter anymore. Additionally even way back you probably could survive on a mostly vegetarian diet without malnutrition, just _mostly_ instead of _purely_ no meat. On the other hand in today's society people consume often way to much meat and often unhealthy meat, too while at the same time not consuming a lot of the plants, roots and mushrooms people likely did eat before civilization started. I guess like so often the answer is balance. But also too-little-nutrious food, both from plants and meat, seems to be becoming increasingly a problem.