sex sells, or in this case stops from selling

Check out this anti-KFC ad, featuring Pamela Anderson. PETA has been using sexy protests for a while (remember the naked supermodels boycotting fur?), but for some reason I found this one especially non-subtle. The title is "Pamela Anderson's Explicit New Video," referring of course not to anything involving Tommy Lee, but rather to footage of chickens being killed in cruel ways. The ad ends with this appeal:

"And if you don't think animal cruelty is a strong enough argument for vegetarianism you might want to at least read up on how eating meat causes impotence. Eating meat clogs up the arteries going to all the organs, not just to the heart, if you catch my drift."

So, by the logic of advertising, does this mean that Pamela Anderson will have sex with you if you stop eating meat? But in that case, wouldn't it be a good idea to eat vast amounts of antibiotic-laced factory-farmed animals beforehand? The paradoxes boggle the mind.