More generally, "I wouldn't trust Wikipedia to give correct $TOPIC information. I've noticed they've been incorrect about this before."

Articles like the one under discussion would be a helluva lot more persuasive if they linked to some resources for their stats. The claims about vegetarianism struck me as clutching at straws just to be contrarian.

To clarify what I meant, for what it's worth, I have personally experienced Wikipedia to be inaccurate with nutritional data, and that's something I've spent a deal of time looking at.