It's a fairly big and stupid generalisation to make
You seem to be basing your logic on:
The least healthy meat eaters vs the most healthy vegans
Plenty of vegans make absolutely deplorable food choices, and plenty of meat eaters make very healthy choices.
As I've already said. Stop talking like there's some automatic health benefit and risk of the two. It's up to what the individual makes their diet up of, not what they classify themselves as.
You're basically using the same logic as the people who think all Muslims are terrorists
Ha... give it another 3 posts and you'll have linked me to Hitler

It was a firmly tongue in cheek comment in response to an equally bad generalization.
Of course there are a heap of external factors, and one can be an incredibly unhealthy vegan too (for instance live on fries and oreos).
That said, there IS an automatic health benefit as it instantly becomes a lot harder to eat unhealthy (fast food is almost off the menu), and people start looking at nutrition labels etc.
I base my beliefs in the science and the numbers, not anecdotes.
The science suggests that vegans are, across a population, a fair bit healthier.
Whether that is solely due to the diet or other exernalities, the numbers don't lie.
Populations that have been vegan or nearly so have been some of the longest lived in this world (Ie okinawan islanders in Japan), and the biggest study undertaken on the issue across 10's of thousands of Seventh Day Adventists in the states who ate little or no meat showed longevity increases of
7.28 years in men and
4.42 years in women in the vegans.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/3/516s.full
Sure it's possible to lead a healthy life that includes animal protein intake, just as a moderate amount of alcohol doesn't automatically consign you to liver failure. But unless you're going to do some research, don't suggest to me what my logic is just because you don't like what I'm saying.