I hope we can agree that we are better off than that now.
What I'm curious about is whether you think it's been a steady stream of improvements, and we just need to improve further? Or if you think there was some point between 1900 and now where food health and safety was maximized, greater than either 1900 or now, and we've regressed since then?
Or put another way: it was a simple question that the ggp can answer or not as they choose. I was just curious for their perspective.
My instinct is that things have largely gotten better over time. At a super-macro level, in 1900 we had directly adulterated food that e.g. the soldiers receiving Chicago meat called "embalmed". In the mid-20th century we had waterways that caught fire and leaded gas.
By the late 20th we had clean(er) air (this is all from a U.S. perspective) and largely safe food. I think if we were to claim a regression, the high point would have to be around 2000, but I can't point to anything specific going on now that wasn't also going on then -- e.g. I think microplastics were a thing then as well, we just weren't paying attention.