Weezl's phase 1- recipe testing and frugalisation- come one, come all!

weezl74

Oh Aless, I'm really sorry if it sounds unfair and I'm very happy to be corrected:), it's just that apart from at a tooth decay level, sucrose and fructose are the same to the body in nutrient terms. They require approx the same metabolic load to turn into glucose which is what the body will turn all sugars into. A sucrose molecule is a glucose plus a fructose molecule, and so is very slightly different to convert, but by miniscule amounts.

And because I know the diet hits vitamin and mineral RDAs through the 5 a day, I just think shirley has less to worry about than she may fear.

Really don't want to be offensive though, and certainly not against people who prefer a sucrose-free diet as ceridwen does.

weezl74

one last thing on that and then I shall let others have lots of say in the sugars debate:o, a study was published a couple of years back where 2 matched groups were given a drink made with glucose or a drink made with fructose (fruit sugar). The fructose group:

"showed an increase in intra-abdominal fat, the kind that embeds itself between tissues in organs, became less sensitive to insulin (the hormone released by the pancreas that controls blood sugar), and showed signs of dyslipidemia—elevated blood levels of lipids. The fructose group also showed increased fat production in the liver, elevated LDL or bad cholesterol and larger increases in blood triglycerides. The group drinking glucose-sweetened beverages showed none of these changes."

sorry I think I'm derailing the thread and making it go a bit 'discussion time' ish

aless02

aha, should've thought of the dentists!! okay, okay, weezl has convinced me!! no more talk about sugars from me...

weezl74

aless02 wrote: »

aha, should've thought of the dentists!! okay, okay, weezl has convinced me!! no more talk about sugars from me...

don't go, I like debating it! And I'm no nutritionist

ceridwen

weezl74 wrote: »

...and on that note too, some people might be interested in this blog, written by a british ex-pat living in Nova Scotia, who is living on UK wartime food rations in order to lose 100lb, she is 315 at the start...

Subsistence with a goal chaps

If we do get the government's ear we could show we're tackling both debt and obesity

Great minds following the same tracks eh Weezl - had a quick check to confirm and I'd just saved that blog yesterday to have a good scout-round it - and already mentally got potato floddies in mind for a tryout.

Still thinking on my 1960s/70s recipes at the moment. Still got yogurt all over my keyboard (good job its a spillproof design - after I ruined a previous one:o). I've just been having a bit of that on top of a 1970s recipe for a leetle snack-ette. Probably doesnt fit in with the Plan - but I'll share it anyways, as 'twas quite nice:):

BREAD PANCAKES
2 oz plain flour (I used white actually....)
2 oz white or brown breadcrumbs (I used granary ones)
2 eggs
2 teaspoons baking powder
8 fl. ozs milk
pinch salt
2 tablespoons oil

- mix all ingredients except oil together
- heat half the oil in an omelette pan (ie frypan 6" wide) and put in half the mixture
- fry till brown/crisp on the bottom
- turn and fry the other side (I played safe by browning it under grill).

It rose quite nicely, looked good and would be fillingness-wise halfway between pancake and bread and do for sweet or savoury purposes.

Errr.....I made up half quantity and just noshed down the lot - with a bit of fruit spread and Greek yogurt (eerr...non-frugal way of serving..). Just thought it would be a handy recipe if I wanted something breadlike and didnt have enough bread (but had got that MSE standby of oddments of bread made up into breadcrumbs to one side).

ceridwen

Lesley_Gaye wrote: »

that really might catch their interest, both debt and obesity are such hot topics at the moment. I'm not sure how we could spin Shirley & Bob's predicament to catch govt interest in our plan, but obesity? Could be the hook, or you never know, pitched the right way, we might get govt interested in people helping themselves, never govt's strong point

One eentsy "nag" I have about the Government angle is I dont want them to feel they have just been handed a useful "excuse" to try cutting benefits money/State pensions. Childless people get such awfully low benefit levels anyway - £64.30 per week - as it is and, if they are in rented accommodation might have to put a bit of that tiny amount towards rent (as, if the powers-that-be deem their rent to be too high - then they wont pay all of it). I'd hate to think that they would go "ach...you could manage dear Mr/Miss Single Person on £25 a month for food" - when actually we fine well want them to remember that Mr/Miss Single Person requires £25 per week for food (and good luck to them if they can manage to scrape a £1 or £2 a week out of that "food element" to actually still have a little bit of social life once in a while).

So - I'm not quite understanding all round what useful purpose would be served by trying to bring the Government into this project anywhere along the line????? Could you explain why you think it would be a good idea to get them on board AND how to prevent them exploiting the Plan with the "law of unintended consequences" as an excuse to try and cut benefit levels even lower?

poohbear59

aless02 wrote: »

no grana padano, unless you're choosing to omit it from the recipes that had been using it?

sad that chickpeas are gone, but c'est la vie!

I have already bought my chick peas:)

Yesterday I finished off the pressure cooking of chick peas, marrowfat peas and kidney beans.

All are in 8oz bags in the freezer. Not sure what that is in grams.

ceridwen, weezl, Regarding the baked beans. If I am putting them in a chilli or using them in a bean curry I always rinse the tomato and sugar mixture off. That is because I am concerned about the amount of sugar and salt in baked beans. However I had never considered the tomato mixture to be one of our five a day!


Also don't worry about me trying your menu plan and you disappearing. If your recipes are not ready I will just have a go at my own and report on here:)

We do have a few rabbits in the freezer to use up some time so I will be making a pie or two during the month. See, I am already doing my own thing.:D

We start on Monday with onion tart!

ceridwen

Re sugar - I dont remember the "ins and outs" of the book "Pure White and Deadly" that I read many years ago now OR of the strength of the sugar lobby (pretty DARN strong as I recall).

However - anyone wanting to go any further into this and who has a spare 1 hour 30 minutes available might be interested to view "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Must find the time to watch it sometime myself.

I'll just remind myself that sugar counts as special treat I know I shouldnt have at all/that some pro-sugar research might well have been funded by sugar companies (often the way with research that tells you that something is perfectly okay - when your gut reaction is still telling you "no it aint at all")/the human race didnt even encounter sugar until a few hundred years ago (so I wonder if our bodies are adapted to cater to it).

Lesley_Gaye

ceridwen wrote: »

One eentsy "nag" I have about the Government angle is I dont want them to feel they have just been handed a useful "excuse" to try cutting benefits money/State pensions. Childless people get such awfully low benefit levels anyway - £64.30 per week - as it is and, if they are in rented accommodation might have to put a bit of that tiny amount towards rent (as, if the powers-that-be deem their rent to be too high - then they wont pay all of it). I'd hate to think that they would go "ach...you could manage dear Mr/Miss Single Person on £25 a month for food" - when actually we fine well want them to remember that Mr/Miss Single Person requires £25 per week for food (and good luck to them if they can manage to scrape a £1 or £2 a week out of that "food element" to actually still have a little bit of social life once in a while).

So - I'm not quite following all round what useful purpose would be served by trying to bring the Government into this project anywhere along the line????? Could you explain why you think it would be a good idea to get them on board AND how to prevent them exploiting the Plan with the "law of unintended consequences" as an excuse to try and cut benefit levels even lower?

not really, I was under the impression that that was what Weezl was after as one of her long term objectives.

I am assuming that Weezl wants to get the govt ear so as to spread the word in some way

Many years ago I had 2 under 5's, no home and no income whatsoever and experienced many difficulties trying to get one and dealing with benefits officers. It is from that place that makes this project interesting to me. If I had had a fishing rod and knew how to fish, my troubles would have been shorter. I eventually emerged the other side, but had to teach myself everything

weezl74

ceridwen wrote: »

So - I'm not quite following all round what useful purpose would be served by trying to bring the Government into this project anywhere along the line????? Could you explain why you think it would be a good idea to get them on board AND how to prevent them exploiting the Plan with the "law of unintended consequences" as an excuse to try and cut benefit levels even lower?

I just don't feel we are educating people to fish and therefore feeding them for life in the area of living within their means.

I'd like to see Gordon Brown create more of a focus on the dangers of getting into debt, and ways out of it. Campaigns about smoking, using your mobile when you drive, how to cross a road safely, not drinking and driving, yes! Debt? Nope!

I'd like to see bread baking taught to every primary school child, followed by cakes, pastry etc. I'd like to see it branded as not just a girl's subject.

I'd like nutrition focussed on in a joined up thinking way rather than scatty, seperate campains that don't tie up to anything else like the 5 a day.

I'd like government to rule out payday loans companies, loan sharking, 'cash my gold' and put at least an upper cap of interest that credit cards and overdrafts can be offered at in the uk. 8% max would be my goal.

Instead of 'cash my gold' shunted between endless, 'I'm not a celebrity-I've just dated one' TV, let's let the BBC as a nationally owned broadcaster make programmes which tell people how to get out of debt.

Lets make them as lovely to watch as 'Kirstie's homemade home' and delias complete christmas, but with kirstie making the christmas decorations out of salt dough, not the £20 glass baubles, and lets get delia using frugal ingredients, on telly, with costings.

Let's not axe or cut benefits, but let's make sure that the healthy start vouchers can be used on dried and tinned Fruit and veg, rather than not that, but it can include chocolate milkshake :mad:

I could go on....

But it's not the place