I also call BS (based on a hunch rather than digging into the evidence, to be clear) on the ‘20% of food’ and ‘$161 billion dollars per year’ numbers, which I am guessing are based on ‘what if everyone magically knew exactly which food was and wasn’t unsafe and we treated all safe food as good as new.’
That seems uncharacteristically optimistic. You think the obvious bullshit is based on, not just reasoning about the physical world, but reasoning about the particular parts of the physical world corresponding to the literal semantics of the words used?
That seems uncharacteristically optimistic. You think the obvious bullshit is based on, not just reasoning about the physical world, but reasoning about the particular parts of the physical world corresponding to the literal semantics of the words used?