Sure it is. Humans don't need four stomachs to handle grain.
You'd need it to eat grass, but the article doesn't say anything about humans eating grass.
> With only grass-fed livestock, individual Americans would still get more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of meat and dairy protein, according to Pimentel's report, "Livestock Production: Energy Inputs and the Environment."
Is there really a "Recommended daily allowance of meat and dairy protein"? Sounds like propaganda from the meat and dairy industry like the food pyramid. I once met someone who studied to be a professional nutritionist, but left the field entirely because it is corrupted by special interests. IIRC to get certified she had to tow the party line that nutritionists should promote animal products as part of a healthy diet, and she decided to change fields instead.
Yeah, the whole food pyramid is various industries competing against each other. The grains recommendation is even nuttier; you're supposed to have a giant pile of pasta and maybe a veggie or two.
the poster you replied to did not say that we needed 4 stomachs to digest grain, either.
you're reading way more into their post than what was said.
it seems your misunderstanding results from the phrase "we'll be set", I think you took this general phrase to mean "we'll all be able to eat grain", yes?
if so, what the term actually means is, "we will be well prepared for the future", something that being able to eat grass would hypothetically help us with, since it would theoretically open up even more food options to more people
It was a direct reply to an article about eating less grain-fed meat and redirecting that crop production to humans, implying we'd need ruminant stomachs to do so.
I'm not sure why some HN discussions turn into a lesson on object permanence.