• archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    as being in teh position to always pay full price for food at a store is a luxury.

    Not if by ‘cost’ they meant ‘cost’, and not ‘what they get from the state at no cost’

          • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            What they claimed was “a whole foods plant-based diet is 30% cheaper.”

            Which is factually supported by the study, even if you’d prefer to interpret it to mean something else

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              What they claimed was “a whole foods plant-based diet is 30% cheaper.”

              Which is factually supported by the study

              …for a limited segment of the population.

              • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                It’s actually not speaking about the personal costs born by consumers, it’s talking about the cost of purchasing food for the diet.

                As I said, if the paper was discussing the systemic hurtles and personal choices of consumers it would be a different paper, saying a different thing.