Big ideas.
Once a week.
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
American families waste a third of the food they purchase
On average, American households dump the equivalent of $1,900 worth of food a year.

- A recent study finds that the average American household wastes a third of its food.
- All told, the U.S. food system squanders billions of pounds of consumable food every year, amounting to billions more in economic losses.
- Improved meal management can help Americans save the money thrown out with their food.
Every August, herds of tourists gather in the tiny town of Buñol, Spain. As lorry trucks haul in payloads of tomatoes, they arm themselves with the fruity munitions and the battle begins. Juicy explosions go off in every direction, participants are painted a sticky red, and the streets flood with a most unsanitary gazpacho.
This is la Tomatina, a festival billed as the world's largest food fight. All told, the 22,000 food warriors throw approximately 150,000 kilograms (330,693 lbs.) of tomatoes.
Anyone who has witnessed the spectacle has entertained two thoughts simultaneously: That looks like disgusting fun and, wow, what a waste of food!
La Tomatina may be a rollicking example of contemporary food waste, but it is hardly the most prodigious. According to a study published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American households waste tons more food every year, and we can't even excuse it as merrymaking. We just toss it in the dump.
Throwing away food (and money)
Participants at la Tomatina splash through the pureed remains of thousands of tomatoes.
Since the study authors couldn't rummage through America's trash, they took the economist approach. Using the USDA's National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS) data, they examined food acquisition for 4,000 American households.
Then they analyzed the biological data of the participants to establish basal metabolic rates. The difference between food acquisition and the metabolic rate needed to maintain body weight was treated as "production inefficiency" — that is, uneaten and wasted food.
Their results show that the average American household wastes 31.9 percent of acquired food. The estimated value of that food is $240 billion annually, or about $1,866 per household.
But not all households waste equally. As Edward Jaenicke, study author and a professor of agricultural economics at Penn State, pointed out in a release: "More than two-thirds of households in our study have food-waste estimates of between 20% and 50%. However, even the least wasteful household wastes 8.7% of the food it acquires."
Based on the study's results, households that squander the least food tend to be either large or lower income. Lower-income households foster better meal-management because of food insecurity, while larger households have more people to eat the food.
Conversely, most wasteful households have higher incomes and employ healthy diets. That's because high incomes didn't necessitate detailed meal-management, while healthier diets were associated with fresh foodstuffs, which perish much quicker than packaged and processed foods.
"It's possible that programs encouraging healthy diets may unintentionally lead to more waste," Jaenicke noted. "That may be something to think about from a policy perspective -- how can we fine-tune these programs to reduce potential waste."
Our inefficient food network
Billions of pounds of food end up in landfills where it produces vast amounts of greenhouse gases.
Americans certainly waste food, but individual households are hardly the only point of misuse in the country's staggeringly inefficient food network.
Food loss occurs at every stage, from farm to dinner table. According to the USDA, Americans wasted 133 billion pounds of food at the retail and consumer levels in 2010 (the USDA's baseline year). Similarly, the EPA averages the loss to be at 218.9 pounds per person.
For some perspective, you would have to hold a la Tomatina festival every day for 1,102 years to generate the amount of food waste produced in the U.S. in 2010 alone.
Worse, America's food system prevents much of this wasted food from reaching the consumer's hands, for either eating or throwing. Vast quantities go directly to a landfill or are plowed under despite being edible.
That's because farmers and retailers believe U.S. consumers won't likely purchase a peach that doesn't meet a cosmetic, near Platonic ideal, of what a peach should look like. Feeding America estimates 20 billion pounds of fruit and vegetables meet such a fate each year.
"Our findings are consistent with previous studies, which have shown that 30% to 40% of the total food supply in the United States goes uneaten — and that means that resources used to produce the uneaten food, including land, energy, water and labor, are wasted as well," Jaenicke said.
In addition to depleted resources, the study authors point out that wasted food exacerbates the current climate crisis. Rotting food produces the greenhouse gasses methane, carbon dioxide, and non-methane organic compounds — collectively called landfill gas. Because of this and other organic wastes, landfills have become the third-largest source of human-caused methane emissions in the U.S.
Waste not, save more

Of course, the best way to reduce food waste and save money isn't to forego healthy eating habits. It's to develop more effective food management. Here are some ideas to help you out:
Plan store trips. Plan your meals a week in advance, and keep a running list of groceries you'll need. Include quantities of food to prevent over-shopping.
Restaurant prudence. Schedule dinners out so food for meals isn't forgotten in the fridge. Only order what you can eat. In restaurants known for excessive portions, request to have the meal split. Beware the buffet blitz.
Buy from bulk bins, not in bulk. Bulk bins allow you to purchase enough food to meet your needs and no more. Buying large amounts of products in bulk, however, results in neglected food. It may cost less per ounce to buy a wheel of cheese versus a smaller quantity, but it only saves money if the entire wheel is eaten before it spoils.
Understand dating definitions. What's the difference between the "sell-by," "use-by," "freeze-by," and "best-before" dates? Hint: Only the use-by date is safety-related and then only for infant formula. The others are recommendations for flavor and quality. The true indicators of spoilage are the odors, flavors, colors, and textures produced by bacteria and other microorganisms. For more information, visit the USDA's webpage on food product dating.
Strategic food prep. Research best practices for storing different foods. For example, vegetables can be washed, dried, and chopped in preparation for their use in salads, but berries should be washed right before use. Also prepared meals that can be frozen for later eating, and develop a rotation system so the oldest foods are the first to be used.
Cook for fewer. Divide recipe ingredients by the number of diners. Keep leftovers and either schedule a leftover night or take them for lunch the next day. But don't you dare reheat that salmon in the office microwave. Keep it at home.
Be creative. Stale bread can become croutons. Overripened bananas whipped up into banana bread. Leftovers resurrected as a whole new meal. Creative thinking can prevent a lot of food from ending up in the dump.
Compost. No amount of creativity will make coffee grounds palatable, but if composted, inedible food can go to better use. You can create your own compost or seek out a community program. Composting offers a better solution for other organic waste, too, such as fall leaves and grass clippings.
With these tips, we can begin to scrape back our share of the food and money wasted every year in American. As for the U.S. food network, the USDA and EPA have teamed up to reduce America's food waste by 50 percent by 2030.
- This Cool Video Urges You to Pay Attention to the Food You Waste ... ›
- Myth: healthy food is more expensive than unhealthy food ›
- A leading cause of climate change? Obesity. - Big Think ›
Dogs digest human food better and poop less
A new study finds that dogs fed fresh human-grade food don't need to eat—or do their business—as much.
- Most dogs eat a diet that's primarily kibble.
- When fed a fresh-food diet, however, they don't need to consume as much.
- Dogs on fresh-food diets have healthier gut biomes.
Four diets were tested
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTU5ODI1MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjY0NjIxMn0._w0k-qFOC86AqmtPHJBK_i-9F5oVyVYsYtUrdvfUxWQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="1b1e4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="87937436a81c700a8ab3b1d763354843" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="1440" data-height="960" />Credit: AntonioDiaz/Adobe Stock
<p>The researchers tested refrigerated and fresh human-grade foods against kibble, the food most dogs live on. The <a href="https://frontierpets.com.au/blogs/news/how-kibble-or-dry-dog-food-is-made" target="_blank">ingredients</a> of kibble are mashed into a dough and then extruded, forced through a die of some kind into the desired shape — think a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_extrusion" target="_blank">pasta maker</a>. The resulting pellets are sprayed with additional flavor and color.</p><p>For four weeks, researchers fed 12 beagles one of four diets:</p><ol><li>a extruded diet — Blue Buffalo Chicken and Brown Rice Recipe</li><li>a fresh refrigerated diet — Freshpet Roasted Meals Tender Chicken Recipe</li><li>a fresh diet — JustFoodforDogs Beef & Russet Potato Recipe</li><li>another fresh diet — JustFoodforDogs Chicken & White Rice Recipe.</li></ol><p>The two fresh diets contained minimally processed beef, chicken, broccoli, rice, carrots, and various food chunks in a canine casserole of sorts. </p><p>(One can't help but think how hard it would be to get finicky cats to test new diets. As if.)</p><p>Senior author <a href="https://ansc.illinois.edu/directory/ksswanso" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Kelly S. Swanson</a> of U of I's Department of Animal Sciences and the Division of Nutritional Sciences, was a bit surprised at how much better dogs did on people food than even refrigerated dog chow. "Based on past research we've conducted I'm not surprised with the results when feeding human-grade compared to an extruded dry diet," he <a href="https://aces.illinois.edu/news/feed-fido-fresh-human-grade-dog-food-scoop-less-poop" target="_blank">says</a>, adding, "However, I did not expect to see how well the human-grade fresh food performed, even compared to a fresh commercial processed brand."</p>Tracking the effect of each diet
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTU5ODI1OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY3NjY1NTgyOX0.AdyMb8OEcjCD6iWYnXjToDmcnjfTSn-0-dfG96SIpUA/img.jpg?width=980" id="da892" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="880d952420679aeccd1eaf32b5339810" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" data-width="1440" data-height="960" />Credit: Patryk Kosmider/Adobe Stock
<p>The researchers tracked the dogs' weights and analyzed the microbiota in their fecal matter.</p><p>It turned out that the dogs on kibble had to eat more to maintain their body weight. This resulted in their producing 1.5 to 2.9 times the amount of poop produced by dogs on the fresh diets.</p><p>Says Swanson, "This is consistent with a 2019 National Institute of Health study in humans that found people eating a fresh whole food diet consumed on average 500 less calories per day, and reported being more satisfied, than people eating a more processed diet."</p><p>Maybe even more interesting was the effect of fresh food on the gut biome. Though there remains much we don't yet know about microbiota, it was nonetheless the case that the microbial communities found in fresh-food poo was different.</p><p>"Because a healthy gut means a healthy mutt," says Swanson, "fecal microbial and metabolite profiles are important readouts of diet assessment. As we have shown in <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jas/article/92/9/3781/4702209#110855647" target="_blank">previous studies</a>, the fecal microbial communities of healthy dogs fed fresh diets were different than those fed kibble. These unique microbial profiles were likely due to differences in diet processing, ingredient source, and the concentration and type of dietary fibers, proteins, and fats that are known to influence what is digested by the dog and what reaches the colon for fermentation."</p>How did kibble take over canine diets?
<p>Historically, dogs ate scraps left over by humans. It has only been <a href="https://www.thefarmersdog.com/digest/the-history-of-commercial-pet-food-a-great-american-marketing-story/" target="_blank">since 1870</a>, with the arrival of the luxe Spratt's Meat Fibrine Dog Cakes—made from "the dried unsalted gelatinous parts of Prairie Beef", mmm—that commercial dog food began to take hold. Dog bone-shaped biscuits first appeared in 1907. Ken-L Ration dates from 1922. Kibble was first extruded in 1956. Pet food had become a great way to turn <a href="https://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/choosing-dog-food/animal-by-products/" target="_blank">human-food waste</a> into profit.</p><p>Commercial dog food became the norm for most household canines only after a massive marketing campaign led by a group of dog-food industry lobbyists called the Pet Food Institute in 1964. Over time, for most households, dog food was what dogs ate — what else? Human food? These days more than half of U.S. dogs are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/magazine/who-made-that-dog-biscuit.html" target="_blank">overweight or obese</a>, and certainly their diet is a factor.<span></span></p><p>We're not so special among animals after all. If something's healthy for us to eat—we're <em>not</em> looking at you, chocolate—maybe we should remember to share with our canine compatriots. Not from the table, though.</p>New study suggests placebo might be as powerful as psychedelics
New study suggests the placebo effect can be as powerful as microdosing LSD.
- New research from Imperial College London investigated the psychological effects of microdosing LSD in 191 volunteers.
- While microdosers experienced beneficial mental health effects, the placebo group performed statistically similar to those who took LSD.
- Researchers believe the expectation of a trip could produce some of the same sensations as actually ingesting psychedelics.
Psychedelics: The scientific renaissance of mind-altering drugs
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="92360c805fe66c11de38a75b0967f417"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5T0LmbWROKY?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>For the study published in eLife, the team recruited 191 citizen cosmonauts to microdose either LSD or a placebo over the course of several weeks and note the psychological effects. Volunteers were already microdosing LSD, so there was no true control. Each volunteer was given instructions on creating their own low-dose gel capsules, some containing LSD, others not. Then they mixed the capsules in envelopes so they didn't know if they were taking the real thing or not.</p><p>The trial design was ingenious: each capsule featured a QR code that was scanned after the addition of ingredients but before they were placed in the envelope so that researchers knew what they were ingesting.</p><p>The problem: volunteers sourced their own LSD. Lack of quality control could have had a profound effect on the results. </p><p>The results: LSD microdosers reported feeling more mindful, satisfied with life, and better overall; they also noticed a reduction in feelings of paranoia. </p><p>The catch: the control group felt the same thing, with no statistical difference between the groups. </p><p>Lead author Balázs Szigeti comments on the findings: "This suggests that the improvements may not be due to the pharmacological action of the drug but can instead be explained by the placebo effect." </p>Credit: Alexander / Adobe Stock
<p>Psychedelics are notoriously difficult to control for given the intensity of the experience. Yet there is precedent for the above findings. A <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-020-05464-5" target="_blank">2019 study</a> found that 61 percent of volunteers that took a placebo instead of psilocybin felt some psychedelic effects, with a few volunteers experiencing full-on trips.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Several stated that they saw the paintings on the walls 'move' or 'reshape' themselves, others felt 'heavy. . . as if gravity [had] a stronger hold', and one had a 'come down' before another 'wave' hit her."</p><p>The Imperial team believes the expectation of a trip might have been enough to produce similar results. Senior author David Erritzoe is excited for future studies on the topic, believing they tapped into a new wave of citizen science that could push forward our knowledge of psychedelic substances.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Accounting for the placebo effect is important when assessing trends such as the use of cannabidiol oils, fad diets or supplements where social pressure or users' expectations can lead to a strong placebo response. Self-blinding citizen science initiatives could be used as an inexpensive, initial screening tool before launching expensive clinical studies."</p><p>As investments into the psychedelics market explode, with one company <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-03/thiel-backed-magic-mushroom-firm-atai-hits-2-billion-valuation" target="_blank">reaching a $2 billion valuation</a>, a recurring irony appears in the long arc of psychedelics and research: the power of our minds might be enough to feel greater life satisfaction and a deeper sense of mindfulness. If that's possible with a placebo, we have to question why the rush to create more pharmacology is necessary. </p><p>This is, mind you, a separate conversation over the role of psychedelics and rituals for group bonding. The function of group cohesion around consciousness-altering substances will continue to play an important role in many communities. </p><p>Of course, we should continue to explore the efficacy of psychedelics on anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, PTSD, and addiction. <a href="https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/antidepressant-effects" target="_self">Pharmacological dependence</a> is a stain on the psychiatry industry. Whether or not psychedelics can be prescribed for daily use remains to be seen, but we know a moneyed interest is expecting a return on investment—the above company, ATAI Life Sciences, raised $157 million in its Series D round. </p><p>When it comes to wellbeing, some things money just can't buy. How we navigate the tricky terrain of mainstreaming psychedelics remains to be seen. </p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Facebook</a>. His most recent book is</em> "<em><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08KRVMP2M?pf_rd_r=MDJW43337675SZ0X00FH&pf_rd_p=edaba0ee-c2fe-4124-9f5d-b31d6b1bfbee" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy</a>."</em></p>Your genetics influence how resilient you are to the cold
What makes some people more likely to shiver than others?
Some people just aren't bothered by the cold, no matter how low the temperature dips. And the reason for this may be in a person's genes.
Harvard study finds perfect blend of fruits and vegetables to lower risk of death
Eating veggies is good for you. Now we can stop debating how much we should eat.
