Why is the only concern that no harm is done to humans? What about animals? Are we not animals ourselves?

But he already said he had a problem with inhumanely produced meat, in other words, actions that cause grave harm to animals. Why would you have that standard at all if you don't care if it's met?

(There's also the land use and emissions angle. Arguably meat consumption causes harm to all humans and beyond.)

I am sure almost every action could indirectly be related to human suffering of some sort. Using a phone for example and there is a good chance that it will have cobalt mined by children in Congo.

One could make the argument that treating animals poorly lowers the value of life.

Kind of like if someone has a poorly maintained house in your neighborhood, it impacts the value of your house.