Why are vegans idiots? Their existence, and success at being healthier than non-vegans, proves meat is not required. We are capable of eating meat, but it is terribly unhealthy to eat a lot of it. Similarly, we are capable of eating refined sugar, but similarly, it’s terribly unhealthy to eat a lot of it. We don’t actually need any meat or refined sugar though, or dairy.

Because they are following a diet that is unhealthy and unnatural. Vegans need supplements to be even close to healthy because they don't eat everything the human body requires. It's becoming common that long term vegans are having to quit it because of the effects of long term deficiency on their bodies. They're the flat earthers of dieting.

What he said

http://www.greatveganathletes.com/athletes

It is not very difficult to be vegan, and a man ,and have labor intensive work.

Also, there is a whole subcontinent (india) full of vegetarians and vegans without long term deficiency effects.

EDIT:

Vegan diet consits of the same food that everyone eat: Bread, Pasta, Rice, Potatoes. Then add a lot of beans, onions, and some vegetables. You can have most food from Indian, Chinese, Mexican, Thai, Italian, Lebanese restaurants easily made vegan.

Thousands of years of evolution made humans omnivorous. We need to eat various things, vegetables like meat. Our body isn't made to eat only meat or only vegetables. It would be like giving only lettuce to a lion or only steaks to a rabbit.

Both only-meat eaters and vegans are doing something unnatural and potentially dangerous for their health, and it's stupid IMO to see this as a religion like some people seem to do. Beliefs shouldn't push people to put their health at risk.

You're a human? Then you're omnivorous. Eat your steak, your veggies, and the other various aliments needed by your body.

EDIT for baloofarsan : https://m.huffingtonpost.in/2016/06/14/how-india-eats_n_10434374.html

First India isn't "full" of vegetarians, and how can you say that Indians are all perfectly healthy, without any deficiency? Is the fact that their life expectancy is 10 years shorter than the US a proof of perfect health? 

hmm... 

While *most* cultures have had meat in their diet, I'd like to point out that for the last couple thousand of years, minus the last hundred fifty or so, that portion was a *very* small proportion of the plate, for the vast majority of the population - simply due to logistic facts of an earlier agricultural society. The poor (and with that, I mean, 90 + % of the population, in medieval times and earlier) almost exclusively fed off of whatever regional starch crop could be grown the most efficiently in that area of the world, be it rice, wheat, corn, etc... Mind you, they had the joy of engaging in continuous heavy physical labour, as well. Which demonstrates the fact that the "omnivore" trait of humans is the *capability* of surviving off of anything, rather than the *necessity*. We are extremely flexible, our bodies have with only very few exceptions the capabilities of synthesizing the necessary out of just about anything.

I don't know where you are getting the male-specific thing from? To my knowledge, these types of deficiencies appear more quickly within women (due to the constant loss of essential material from menstruation.) Sexual hormones which distinguish female/male otherwise are generally synthesized by the body, not consumed. Which makes sense, since they are extremely specific from species to species.

I mean, of course you anyone can live off of a vegan diet if they wanted to, in the modern day. Nutrition isn't voodoo magic, we know what each meal is composed of, and if you really want to, the exact nutritional properties of meat can be recreated with no trouble at all from non-animal products (GMOs, etc.. can make that even easier). What's "natural" really shouldn't come into play when we have access to more extensive knowledge. What actually gets absorbed by the body, after all the digestion are some pretty simple molecules we'd have no issues synthesizing in a lab to perfection, if you're really picky about it.

Both of those sides are no better than flat earthers. Either diet would require alot of nutritional supplements to make up for what they would be lacking although the meat diet wouldn't be that deficient if they ate the organs of animals.

What nutritional components specifically (that aren't produced by the body without issue) would you say can't be found in non-animal food source?

Do yourself a favor and look it up. I'm not gonna treat ya like a six year old and explain common sense information to you.

An all exclusive diet is never right. That is not how we as humans evolved. We need to maintain a balanced diet, with vegetables, fruits, nuts, meat, fish and all in between.