I think this is fundamentally true (although it has issues when it scales down to insects and below that requires an arbitrary line to be drawn) but I'm not convinced that being absolute about it is useful in harm reduction.

It's objectively better that someone looks to buy meat from a farm that cares about the welfare of its animals than one that maximizes profit at the cost of the wellbeing and happiness of the animal.

Naturally it's better still if they reduce or stop their meat consumption, but making it black-and-white can potentially result in a worse outcome by setting the bar higher than the consumer is willing to jump.