Eating Well V's Eating Cheaply??

EssexHebridean

leiela wrote: »

I'll fully admit i don't buy freerange.. i can't afford to with the amounts i buy, besides i truely belive that you can drive yourself mental with that stuff ... yes i do care about the animals but im the sort of person that if i truely made the decision to only buy free range EVERYTHING would have to be freerange... have you ever tried asking if the leather on your handbag was freerange??? ekkk ... i know it's bad but i for the most part i just try not to think about it.

Leiela - thanks for posting those details at last. I think it will give people a lot of insight into your diet/budget which was missing before. To comment specifically on your final paragraph -leather is slightly different as most bags, shoes etc are made from cows leather and there are rather less welfare issues with beef cattle (Not dairy cattle though - big problems there) than with, for example, pigs and hens. I also take the view that leather is a by-product of an animal that has already served its "purpose" to use a horrible phrase, by being eaten, thus I think the situation is more acceptable.

I agree that some people take the whole "free range/organic" thing to extremes - however, something I've noticed is that the better quality the meat, the less meat I need to eat in a meal. Personally I buy "happy meat" and free range eggs, in part because of the animal welfare issues but also because of the taste and the fact that I know it has to be far, far healthier to eat meat that's been raised well in a healthy environment with far less need for supplements, anti-b's etc. My conscience also won't let me enjoy eating something which I know full well had a miserable, pain filled existence I'm afraid - and I'm not the sort of person who can just "not think about it". Quite honestly, if we can't get good quality "happy meat" (Sorry, awful fluffy phrase but I can't think of a better one as "free range" doesn't really apply to livestock so well!) and FR eggs, we don't eat eggs or meat. It's that simple. If things got tighter (our food spend at the moment for myself and rugby-playing OH is around £40-45 per week which I think is pretty reasonable) then I might go as far as barn reared eggs, higher welfare chicken and ditch organic milk and cheese in favour of standard. The organic veg box would also probably go. Meat though would still come from the farmers market, just in lower quantities! I could probably easily enough shave another £10 a week off my bill without compromising my principles.

One thing that is interesting to me is that since we have changed the way we buy meat and the quality of the meat has increased, my hypoglaecemia has been almost 100% controlled for the first time since I first knew I suffered with it around 14 years ago. I now only rarely have problems, and can even emerge from the end of a week working at a beer festival without any major side effects. Nothing else has changed apart from that, so I can only put it down to the reduced number of additives etc in the meat. Like the person with Crohns I really know if I eat badly for a prolonged period - I'm a little overweight but not massively, and more to the point my size has hardly varied in about 5 years now (except for dropping a dress size when I was ill before christmas!). That stability in my weight also ties up pretty accurately with the last time I weighed myself, which raises a few more interesting questions!

*general comment*

I think (please note this is my opinion before anyone shouts me down!) that part of the reason this whole thread has caused such a heated debate is that we're all sick to the back teeth of being told what we should and shouldn't eat by the food police that seem to be on every corner now. How long, I wonder, before someone makes a real proposal that rationing should be brought back "for the good of our health, of course" which will then limit the amount of certain types of food we can buy in a week? We all know that obesity is a problem, but how many "fat people" honestly don't realise they're fat? Very few I suspect. In fact, I'd lay money on if you lined up 100 underweight people on one side of the room, and 100 overweight people on the other, and asked those who knew they had a problem with their weight to leave the room, the majority of the skinny folk would still be stood in the same place when the doors closed again. The problem with people being overweight has a lot more to do with lack of physical exercise than with food, in a lot of cases.

greenbee

steve-o - no, I don't mean a dietician. The GP recommended someone with a degree in nutrition, as she didn't want to give me a diet sheet, but guidelines as to what I might need to change about what I eat in relation to specific health issues.

I think the problem on this thread has arisen, as a number of people have pointed out, due to a misunderstanding of the tone of leiela's original post. It's easily done in written discussions, so maybe we'll all learn something from this!

It's also opened up some interesting debate and proved that most OSers wouldn't compromise healthy eating for cost unless really up against it, and that they are more likely than most, even in those circumstances, to be able to provide themselves and their families with the healthiest meals possible on their budget.

And we all now know that there are plenty of knowledgeable people around who can provide pointers to authoritative sources of information on what makes a healthy balanced diet rather than relying on hearsay/opinion.

I'm afraid I agree the majority about the idea of keeping a food diary. I have to do it occasionally, and by the time I've checked, weighed and written down the food I'm not usually that keen on eating it :rolleyes:

kitschy

HeidiBoo wrote: »

I daresay there's a lot of people in the same or similar situations, who maybe don't want to post on here about them. I'm in tears just typing this, seeing it and knowing everyone else is reading....so you can imagine how defensive they felt, because however the posts were meant they come across as CHOICE, when for so many it's not, it's life. Maybe during a short week, or month, or longer.

Serial lurker here - I just wanted to give Heidiboo a big hug:kisses3: (can't find the little smilie for that so you got a kiss instead). Think you're doing a fab job in a difficult situation - keep your pecker up - your little one is very lucky

Dave101t

lets get back on track shall we?
I would eat papa johns pizza 7 times a week if i could (3 times last week) but most my meals are a morrisons salad, with fruit cocktail tin for dessert. i know i should make my own meals but surely these count as they are not processed? cheap too.

food bill comes in at 50/ week for two of us, alot i know but i think thats sainsburys, not the food in question.

MrsBartolozzi

leiela wrote: »

Todays food :-

I have a feeling people will tear it to pieces but heyhoo ... ask and you shall recive.

Well here I go:p , no, not really lol, but I do have a couple of queries.

[quote+leiela;18607205]
Total cost for the day roughly - £8.49p
[/quote]
Ok, here I go, please note this is not a dig at you or your menus, the pedant in me needs clarification:rolleyes: . £8.49 times 7 is £60 (bar a few pennies) not £50 and you appear not to pay for your children's breakfasts and lunches. Do you just not include them in this money . If so it's a bit of a cheat imho to claim you spend £50 on your family's food when it obviously costs more.

This also makes me wonder if you are underestimating the costs of some ingredients, especially if they are a smaller part of a packet/jar etc. I give as an example, and I may be wrong..

Pudding for Kids - Dessert whip with Banana - 20p ish


The cheapest instant whip I have seen recently is 7p (sains basics) this needs 300ml of milk. From your blog you bought 2l of milk for £1.15 so this 300ml costs 17.25p bringing the pudding to nearly 25p before the banana is added (another 10-20p perhaps?).
Using these examples it is possible that you are spending far more than £50 on feeding your family in a week.
Now please believe me it is not my intention to undermine what you have said or done, but with 2 hungry boys who like their meat I was genuinely interested in how you managed on £50 with all that added chicken and protein stuff.
I imagine you are striving to feed your family well, while keeping to a strict budget and while keeping to unusually expensive dietary needs, but I do feel that when you came on to scrutinise others' meals you were opening yourself to the same scrutiny and as is I don't see how your £50 a week adds up.
Please can you post back with answers to my questions.

MrsB.

(sorry for the long post:o )

squirrelchops

Thanks for up to date info on price of cheap tinned tomatoes.

Since I had a clear out of cupboards and found 10 tins lurking I havent bought any for a while!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

leiela

MrsBartolozzi wrote: »

Well here I go:p , no, not really lol, but I do have a couple of queries.

[quote+leiela;18607205]
Total cost for the day roughly - £8.49p

Ok, here I go, please note this is not a dig at you or your menus, the pedant in me needs clarification:rolleyes: . £8.49 times 7 is £60 (bar a few pennies) not £50 and you appear not to pay for your children's breakfasts and lunches. Do you just not include them in this money . If so it's a bit of a cheat imho to claim you spend £50 on your family's food when it obviously costs more.

This also makes me wonder if you are underestimating the costs of some ingredients, especially if they are a smaller part of a packet/jar etc. I give as an example, and I may be wrong..

Pudding for Kids - Dessert whip with Banana - 20p ish


The cheapest instant whip I have seen recently is 7p (sains basics) this needs 300ml of milk. From your blog you bought 2l of milk for £1.15 so this 300ml costs 17.25p bringing the pudding to nearly 25p before the banana is added (another 10-20p perhaps?).
Using these examples it is possible that you are spending far more than £50 on feeding your family in a week.
Now please believe me it is not my intention to undermine what you have said or done, but with 2 hungry boys who like their meat I was genuinely interested in how you managed on £50 with all that added chicken and protein stuff.
I imagine you are striving to feed your family well, while keeping to a strict budget and while keeping to unusually expensive dietary needs, but I do feel that when you came on to scrutinise others' meals you were opening yourself to the same scrutiny and as is I don't see how your £50 a week adds up.
Please can you post back with answers to my questions.

MrsB.

(sorry for the long post:o )[/quote]

yup it's np ... i guess everyone has cheaper and more expensive days i guess today was just a more expensive day

As i said in my blog, i'm interested to see myself when it all balances out if i am actually sticking to the £50 it may well be that i am still relying on more cuboard stuff than i imagined... hey its all a good test

Yes i don't count the kids breakfast during the week as they go to childcare in the morning so that get's paid with that, and i don't count the kids dinner money either as that comes out of a different account, though im debating moving them to packed lunchs after half term and if i do then then my food budget will have to go up.. but on the flip side im hoping to save money because atm i pay £80 a month just on that.

Erm... next question .. hehe.

Yes its true i'm not quite 100% sure of the cost of everything in my cuboards i wasn't expecting to have to do this haha.. its all abit winged and guessed atm... like atm the meat and veg is all over the place... i got a £30 hamper how the hell do you break that down??? so atm costs are VERY VERY rough guess's.

erm on the dessert whip thing, the one i got was 11p, banana's i worked out to be about 10p (asda smartprice ones) and my kids don't like it made with milk... freaks... but hey waters cheaper :P ... hmm actually i did work it out wrong, the "whip" did 4 small glass's (enough for 2 days) so i guess it's 11p / 2 = 5.5p + 11p banana = 16.5p .. blah 20p is close enough hehe.

tbh the whole thing is likely to be highly inaccurate, i do still have bits in my cuboards from the old days .. i didn't weigh all the meat and veg before i started using it etc etc ... ive got suff in the cuboards that i Have NO CLUE what its worth haha.

so far though i havn't ever spent over the £50 but as people have pointed out 1 month is nothing, lets see how i do once things like washing powder start running out but tbh if it ends up bieng £60 or £70 then im happy its still alot less than i ever thought would be possible and im getting better each week and each week i find ways of cutting the costs that little bit further.

i've only been at this "budgeting" things since christmas, im certainly open to the idea that £50 isn't sustainable long term... but we'll see im certainly enjoying the challenge.

ceridwen

Well....thats me gone from this thread then....I dislike arguments myself.....

so I'll head off back to the "safe haven" of the rest of the Old style Board........

misskool

EssexHebridean wrote: »

*general comment*

I think (please note this is my opinion before anyone shouts me down!) that part of the reason this whole thread has caused such a heated debate is that we're all sick to the back teeth of being told what we should and shouldn't eat by the food police that seem to be on every corner now. How long, I wonder, before someone makes a real proposal that rationing should be brought back "for the good of our health, of course" which will then limit the amount of certain types of food we can buy in a week? We all know that obesity is a problem, but how many "fat people" honestly don't realise they're fat? Very few I suspect. In fact, I'd lay money on if you lined up 100 underweight people on one side of the room, and 100 overweight people on the other, and asked those who knew they had a problem with their weight to leave the room, the majority of the skinny folk would still be stood in the same place when the doors closed again. The problem with people being overweight has a lot more to do with lack of physical exercise than with food, in a lot of cases.

Not meaning to cause offence but one of the main reasons why people are overweight is because of the portion sizes that are considered normal now. People have gotten used to larger portions and eating more on the move.

Exercise is also important but that's only part of the story.

katholicos

misskool wrote: »

Exercise is also important but that's only part of the story.

It is also dependant on whether or not one has health problems.

I am overweight, but i have chronic asthma and neurological problems and also suffer severe head pain many days of every week of my life. While trying to improve my health by doing some small amount of excercise each day (and also having two children to look after and that keeps me busy), it is also excercise that can bring on an asthmatic exaccerbation. Before i got ill i was energetic, slim, outgoing...then i found myself being rushed to hospital in an ambulance with pneumonia, scepticemia and suspected meningitis, my immune system was shot to pieces after a week on an IV drip of constant high dose antibiotics and i developed lung problems etc soon after i left hospital (aside from the pneumonia). And that is just my personal circumstances. But to the world who don't know me personally, i'm probably considered a 'fatty who doesn't look after her body'.

I believe that it is all too easy to see overweight people as being slovenly and lethargic (not that i suggest you are of this opinion - i am just adding to the points you have already made).

Excess weight is an 'obvious over-indulgence', so to speak. People can be drug users and alcoholics, anorexics or buliemics but may well manage to disguise their health problems and will likely never recieve the stares, the jibes, or be the *butt* of jokes and ridicule etc...whereas a person who is overweight has no where to hide....is often portrayed in the media as a lazy drain on NHS resources, or as someone who is inept in the basic knowledge of the food pyramid.