Well let's change that to, "
No animal needs to die and be eaten by me so that I can live." Otherwise, we get into if humans are animals, and if police and military count. And then you could say, "But, they chose that profession", but then you one could argue that a very real need + luck & statistics did and intent had very little to do with it. Then there are countless products which require animal byproducts. Anything with glue: smartphones, TV's, computers, etc.
But, wait a second, regardless, we're left with the cold reality that whether you eat them or not, we're going to kill them and use their byproducts.
So, what's your point again? Lol.
I suppose you could say you want to minimize the effect of the death of animals contributes to your life by not eating them. But, one wonders if going to live in the woods and give up basic forms of technology while eating deer would actually be on a higher moral perch. I'm betting it would.
So, were left with:
No animal whose death is convenient for me to give up should die.
But, then we look at how much of the cow is used for meat vs their byproducts, but that gets reduced to, "Well, a dead cow is a dead cow."
Not trying to be a dick, just
fleshing the issue out. Anyway, I think you probably just meant,
"If I can make a small and convenient change to which products I use so that they might be treated better, eventually.. I will." Which is about where I am, and where most people are, probably. To send the point home, it appears milk and veal-based products like hotdogs are what contribute to the popularity of dairy cows, so subtracting that from your diet does 99% of the heavy lifting when it comes to the moral injustice involved in that industry.