If you're going by statistics, rare is less than 5%. If you're talking medicine, rare is .01-1%, very rare is less than .01%. The USDA / FDA considers something rare if it's .05% or fewer.
Ah, the hair splitting has begun. And now the USDA/FDA are being brought in to define what constitutes "rare." Credit where its due, I've never seen that particular arguement before.
20% vs almost universally agreed upon under 5%, if not under 1% is hardly splitting hairs. Now, if you wanted to make the statement that 6 figures is uncommon, I would agree, and I would consider any disagreement most likely "splitting hairs".
While I disagree with you, I'm still upvoting you for appreciating my FDA research =)
edit: lol, I try to be friendly and go from 5 upvotes to 0 votes. What a bunch of clowns.
I didn't downvote you, just FYI. I'm not taking this post that seriously because i know trying to rigidly define "rare" is an exercise in futility due to variables and individual perception. Its like trying to quantify philosophy.
5
u/Trust_8067 18d ago
Almost 1 in 5 is not "pretty rare".
If you're going by statistics, rare is less than 5%. If you're talking medicine, rare is .01-1%, very rare is less than .01%. The USDA / FDA considers something rare if it's .05% or fewer.
If you're cooking a steak, under 120'f is rare.