← Back to context

Comment by notnaut

13 hours ago

I would much rather rely on data on this kind of question over vibes. Efficiency means things move quicker and cheaper, and a few people get richer. It does not by any means inherently increase safety. The effects of a fuckup in a hugely efficientized industry often scale directly with just how much efficiency was mined away from caution and human-interaction.

Bubba flipping burgers getting his dirty hands on your meal might make you sick, but Bobba inspecting the meatslop production line with constant pressure from upper management to be as efficient as possible according to whatever recent regulations were stripped back might accidentally spray the horse-meat product decontaminizer on the pig-meat product, generating a national pandemic.

Data is incredibly clear that industrial-scale food production is cleaner than small-business food production.

  • Is it just a question of variance in the size of the issue? Is having 10 incidents of 10 people each the same as one with 100?

    I’ve argued in systems reliability that once you are already high reliability you are better off lowering incident size vs total unavailability.

  • But there isn’t one size of food producer. I would think there are diminishing marginal returns on food safety after a certain size. At that point perhaps the blast radius of mistakes offsets the advantage of scale. It’s a false dichotomy to consider only national producers and local producers.

  • What data might that be? I've looked and there doesn't appear to be any authoritative source of long-term data for either # of reported foodborne illness outbreaks or # of individuals sickened in this way per year, either of which would clearly demonstrate a dip in sickness rates if industrial-scale food production does, in fact, result in cleaner production.

Given the lack of research into the matter, I present the following pilot study for HN to use:

Number of times the lettuce I grew at home this year made me shit a tsunami: 0

Number of times lettuce I bought at the store this year made me shit a tsunami: 1

  • And did you grow enough lettuce to supply yourself for a whole year? If not the problem remains.

    • A couple of things:

      1) you're taking my comment too seriously.

      2) assuming I had enough space to subsistence farm for my household (I don't), I wouldn't try growing lettuce year-round. Lettuce in the cooler months, peppers and tomatoes in the warmer months.

      3) the majority of the lettuce I've prepared in my home this year did come from my patio

    • Containers. When it's nice out, they live outside. When it's not nice out, they move indoors. yeah yeah, not op, but it's possible. If you're growing food to sustain yourself for a whole year, I'm assuming you're willing to sacrifice some indoor space to accommodate.

      Also, the GP doesn't read to me the way you're interpreting it. To me the GP has grown produce and purchased produce this year. The purchase hit him while the grown at home did not.

      2 replies →

  • I'm going to give you a really strong counterexample to this. One of the most commonly acquired parasites that comes from gardening is toxoplasmosis.

    But doesn't toxoplasmosis come from owning cats?

    Nope. The correlation between cat ownership and toxoplasmosis is basically zero. Because toxoplasmosis comes from stray cats who poop in your garden and you catch them through the gardening. Something like 40% of toxoplasmosis cases come from gardening with people unaware that stray cats poop there. (The majority comes from eating undercooked food, like pork, because the pork grazed in fields where there was stray cat poop.)

    So essentially doing your own gardening creates a risk vector that is significantly less present in industrial-level gardening of vegetables.