[dappermanneke]

is this a joke? yes, there is obviously a loss of energy and material as waste when go a step, just like in real ecological networks where one animal eating another does not absorb everything its body has to offer for nutrients

[markstos]

It's not a joke, because people continue to eat inefficiently higher up on the food chain.

[PeterisP]

We aren't so starved so as to have to prioritize eating efficiently, people will eagerly prioritize aspects of taste and eat inefficiently, and it's great that they can do that - it would be horrific and a symptom of unacceptable overpopulation if people couldn't afford to eat "inefficiently" and would have to resort at eating whatever as long as it has sufficient nutrients.

[markstos]

Animal agriculture is a major driver of climate change, so we are already at the point where food choices made a significant difference.

Thankfully, there are plenty of great tasting plant-based foods.

[_3u10]

I’d be willing to eat more meat to reduce the population of carbon producing animals.

[dappermanneke]

i’ll take my farmed salmon and you can eat what you want, including the bony and not very tasty feed fish if you so desire