That's setting a pretty high bar for the author, no? They're locked inside their apartment building and can't really go out and start knocking on doors and surveying the population at large - in fact I think that would get them into trouble pretty quickly. So we don't have anything but conjecture and common sense (and various reports, videos posted elsewhere in these comments) to go on.
I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that if there are people who are not able to earn money and there's spotty food provisions from the state, that people will be starving.
Given the bartering that seems to be going on, it sounds like the author has good connections with their neighbours, certainly enough to be aware of anyone actually starving - and I don't doubt they'd highlight specific cases in the article if they knew of any.
A reasonable assumption is still an assumption, but it may be that there are additional support networks (formal or otherwise) to help those most at risk.
Yeah it seems they have some contact with their neighbours who would likely have similar means as them. They are not the vulnerable population we're talking about though.
But I am glad you agree it is the more reasonable assumption and therefore more likely to be reality than the alternative (that everyone's being taken care of and it's all fine).
People ARE starving.
There is plenty of evidence of this, not everything has to be outlined in the OP's article. This is like how the Russian people are saying there's no proof the exact tanks which killed civilians in Bucha were Russian, since no one has been able to go in and verify the exact tanks in person yet, so therefore it didn't happen.
Your responses in this thread are really giving off wumao vibes.
