And that it can result in more deaths than hunting and eating one large animal.
I admit that modern agriculture can and should be improved to be less cruel. I would still be uncomfortable with the act of killing and eating the flesh of a sentient being like me.
You can use their own “equation” against their logic. Raising and Slaughtering one large animal requires it be fed, which relies on that same agriculture they’re trying to argue against. In fact it’s at a worse ratio too; no matter how efficient animal agriculture practices get, you will lose energy converting grain and grass to meat. This is extremely basic energy math (Trophic Levels).
So really what they’re arguing for is that we have all of these excess small deaths required to grow the feed required to raise a big animal, and then we slaughter and kill the big animal too.
(And hunting on the scale this person suggests is asinine, especially if they expect meat to continue being a staple they eat multiple times a day, and for this to be true for the whole meat eating population.)