4 ms·
Some food should be wasted. If 100% of food were consumed, that would mean that any slight disruption would result in not enough food, or that we were already i
by imgabe 4y ago
Some food should be wasted. If 100% of food were consumed, that would mean that any slight disruption would result in not enough food, or that we were already in a state where there is not enough food. Wasting some food is better than having food shortages. Much better.
- tomnipotent 4y agoWe've built a society that's so litigious that companies are incentivized to recommend throwing away food even if there's less than a 0.01% chance of food-borne illness. Our waste is in part out of fear of getting sued or sick, but I'm not convinced the waste is the lesser of two evils. Food poisoning sucks, but it's survivable. Unlike starvation. A good example of this caution is eggs and refrigeration, for which American's and European's have opposite ways of handling things.
- pracer 4y agoI think the point missing is that food that get wasted could not arrive where it is needed before getting rot. Letting aside the expenses to do that. The problem is not that we waste food, as it would not solve starvation, the problem is that in those places where people has no food, there is no production.