Is it too risky to back veganism?

The big break through on animal rights will probably come when we begin to be taken as seriously as global warming and global food shortages, because each one of those issues need answers which have strong altruistic components. But there’s always going to be a doubt about the chance of repairing things and then a further doubt about animal rights having anything to do with any final solutions. The connections haven’t yet been made between these three vital issue areas. There’s a further doubt about the ability of humans to take on such a radical diet change. And that isn’t helped by a general view amongst people that what vegans are saying is too weird, and that, as a solution to world problems, it seems implausible. On top of all this the cure seems worse than the complaint – taking on a plant-based diet seems very inconvenient. Veganism seems too risky a prospect to back.
Perhaps vegans have to stand up against all this doubt and put forward their message nonetheless. In other words we have to hang in there even though there’s no easy way to say what we have to say. This ethic of not-touching-animals is a tough one to present, but it’s impossible to water it down or make vegan principles more digestible. If veganism is to be seen as attractive it is for the way it represents the bigger picture and not because it gives us an easy answer.
For vegans, the complete picture we are advocating is not only a change of diet but a change of attitude on a number of levels. From food choices right down to the need to level status, not just between each other but between species. Does this seem too much to pile on the plate?