Yes, the title has changed but the cast of characters remains the same…

Let’s see, since Part 2 in this series we’ve debated and settled the burning technical question of whether or not our decision to include seafood in our otherwise vegetarian diet entitled us to wear the mantle of “vegetarian.” You’ll recall that some in the vegetarian community were pretty sensitive about who used the title and, upon learning that we were eating fish, promptly informed us that we didn’t qualify. It was much the same response we’d received from the vegan community who told us we didn’t fit the required profile for membership because we hadn’t shunned leather shoes and car seats, and weren’t wearing hemp clothing.

But thanks to a more forgiving arm of vegetarianism, we accepted the distinction of “pescevegetarians” - otherwise vegetarians that, like us, eat fish and other seafood. And before you point out that the word isn’t in the dictionary, remember that our conversion was aimed at adopting a more healthy diet, not making a political, spiritual or ecological statement. A “title”, at least for us, serves merely to facilitate discussion and simplify ordering in restaurants.

So here we are, nearly two months into our epicurean adventure into pescevegetarianism (impressive non-word, isn’t it?) and an update seems in order. Are we still on program? Yes, pretty much so. Do we miss cheese, dairy, meat? Not terribly. Are we still contributing to methane in the atmosphere? Sometimes, and we haven’t quite nailed down which foods, or combinations of foods, cause us to, uh, contribute. But it’s infrequent, so we’re taking that as a sign our bodies are adjusting.