PETA fallacy example?

PETA posted an ad saying "You wouldn't let your child smoke. Like smoking, eating meat causes heart disease and cancer. Go Vegan" 

What fallacy, if any, is being used?

I would argue

1) weak analogy . Even if factually true (there are many nuances here), eating meat is a significantly less serious risk factor than smoking. It is similar to arguing, "You wouldn't let your children ride bulls. Like bull riding, bike riding causes deadly accidents. Play Chess."

2) false equivalence for the same reasons as above.

There is an appeal to emotion, I am not sure if it's a fallacy in that case as it seems appropriate. 

I believe there is a weak/false analogy fallacy by stating that smoking and eating meat are alike.  This analogy puts too much weight on the similarities. Yes eating red meats in excess might cause some cancers (that's not really proven), and isn't good for your heart. 

Some meat red, white, fish...  is healthy and is even necessary to get the nutriments your body needs if you don't have access to supplements or other type of food. Depriving a kid during his growth and even adults from any meat could be harmful. 

Smoking on the other side, doesn't provide any benefit whatsoever and is harmful for the smoker and others around even in small quantities in all circumstances.