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

grandma247

oldMcDonald wrote: »

The idea behind this is amazing - a plan that people could follow for £100 a month that is quite probably more nutritionally balanced than the diet they have beforehand. They can then stick to it, tweek it, or add in a few non negotiables and still be shaving a large amount off of their food bill.

It is a great plan and it is something I personally have thought about for many many years. Mainly for teaching my kids how to live on as little as possible but I do/did realise that loads of others could benefit too.
Perhaps you could write a forward with your aims on the finished product so people will understand what you are trying to do.
There will always be people who do not read all before replying but you can not do much about them and there will be many more people who will benefit.
I hope I am making some sense.
EDIT: Perhaps I should just go back to bed. I thought I was replying to Weezl. I meant for you to write a forward Weezle.

domesticgoddess789

Weezl, I have sent you a PM containing what I have compiled on this:


We had some leftovers last night, I don't want to waste them!

I hope it is what you envisaged, but if it is not then do say and I will have another go!

SusanC_2

aless02 wrote: »

what's all the fuss about pig's head? Last week one of the guys on masterchef australia cooked it and not only did it look nice, but he won the challenge!

But then i'm a bit of a weirdo as i vividly remembering butchering chickens and rabbits at various points in my childhood

I get the impression that that kind of thing is more common in the US than here.

weezl74 wrote: »

Here's how I see it. If a person who normally spends £500 in a month on food in the supermarket posted a meal planner, it would just be accepted, people would like and use and enjoy their recipes, perhaps making their own tweaks away from a particular ingredient they don't like.
...
what makes me feel really sad is that because I have chosen a different price point, or perhaps for some other reason, i'm not sure, the health thing just feels like it's a bit out of hand.

I can't really believe that if we sent anyone into a uk supermarket to do a month's shop even with £500 that they'd come back with something that has the right amount of calories, carbs, protein fats, every vitamin and mineral no transfats. I just believe the chances are too slim. But there's no scrutiny applied to the £500 a month basket. Why is that? And why does cheap mean scrutiny?

Possible reasons:
- Healthy food is perceived as expensive therefore cheap food must be unhealthy.
- People don't have the knowledge/skills to find cheaper things which still provide good nutritional value so therefore assume it isn't possible.
- People feel too challenged by the idea that they could eat for so much less and still be healthy (i.e. they are not doing it as well as they could be) so they deny the possibility to avoid challenging themself and their preconceived ideas.
- The most obvious cheap food is cheap junk food and people don't realise that you can get decent proper food at low prices.
- Animal products have a lot of nutrients in them but a lower priced meal plan inievitably has less of these - it is fairly well known that there are nutrients which vegetarians/vegans have to be particular about because it is easy to miss out on them if not eating meat/animal products unless you pay particular attention.

SusanC_2

ceridwen wrote: »

So - with the fact that those of us who place health as our top priority in deciding what food to buy/eat - then we would still check a low-cost meal planner (ANY low cost meal planner...) to see if there were cheaper fruit/veg we could use instead of what we are actually using and perhaps cheaper flours (though still not white)/cheaper grains/cheaper nuts - as we would also like to save money if we could.

I'm always looking for cheaper foods/recipes too - I just adapt them to fit my own requirements.

weezl74 wrote: »

About white sugar having no nutritional value, I disagree. And I am happy to explain why and why I believe the planner is still healthy if anyone would like me to.

(Unsuprisingly) I would be interested.

Sian_the_Green

ceridwen wrote: »

(ooh...gets headaches myself reading this conflicting nutritional info. Just been reading a website about how some peoples have managed to remain perfectly healthy and scurvy-free with no Vitamin C from fruit/veg at all - ie the Eskimos. Went off wondering whether a high-meat diet might actually be a very healthy one then - but Governments are hiding that fact because there are too many people on the planet for everyone to eat that way - all that land required for animals........). The more I read - the more I wonder if we are being persuaded to accept lower-grade food to cover the fact that there are now too many people for everyone to eat a high-grade diet.........

People are able to eat a more varied and, what I would consider, healthy diet these days than they have ever been able to. Children seldom die early any more, people are aware of the different vitamins and minerals and are able to get them from their supermarkets in bottles if they can't be bothered to buy all the fruit and veg. We don't need to preserve things in massive amounts of salt and are able to have protein at more frequent intervals to keep our bodies ticking over. For people like my Mum who are at risk of osteoperosis there are supplements to take, for those who are diabetic there are drugs to balance their sugars, for people with allergies we can purchase foods which protect them. People used to die
much younger and some of the problems we have today with pensions etc are because people don’t die soon enough for us financially! A friend of mine who is a doctor says that the health service is a victim of its own success; people used to die of things like MRSA all the time and people didn’t bat an eyelid, now we think everyone needs to live forever. I don’t think sometimes we appreciate how good things are and the way in which we are able to trust the water we drink not to be toxic, that we have a sewage system that keeps us from so many diseases, that we have a benefit system that means that we can give free school meals to families who can’t afford to put the same on the table as they would like. Of course we have had the advent of junk food, but if we want to, we can eat like Kings or Queens from history!
Weezl, the sweetness of your heart astounds me, I think keep the chin up old girl and keep plodding on!

SusanC_2

I should add though that although I avoid sugar, I am perfectly happy for it to be included in the plan as I accept that the majority of people have different views on it and are quite happy to have it.

SusanC_2

ceridwen wrote: »

Then perhaps it would be good if you explain further re white sugar then...:) and it would be useful if you could give links to the websites/books that the information came from..

(ooh...gets headaches myself reading this conflicting nutritional info. Just been reading a website about how some peoples have managed to remain perfectly healthy and scurvy-free with no Vitamin C from fruit/veg at all - ie the Eskimos. Went off wondering whether a high-meat diet might actually be a very healthy one then - but Governments are hiding that fact because there are too many people on the planet for everyone to eat that way - all that land required for animals........). The more I read - the more I wonder if we are being persuaded to accept lower-grade food to cover the fact that there are now too many people for everyone to eat a high-grade diet.........
(whoops...sorrees...could be said to be "politics"....)

I can't remember exactly which part but you do get vitamin C from animals.

maltesers_2

ceridwen wrote: »

Then perhaps it would be good if you explain further re white sugar then...:) and it would be useful if you could give links to the websites/books that the information came from..

(ooh...gets headaches myself reading this conflicting nutritional info. Just been reading a website about how some peoples have managed to remain perfectly healthy and scurvy-free with no Vitamin C from fruit/veg at all - ie the Eskimos.

Re: sugar - I don't think white gugar is a nutrient at all in fact it is an anti nutrient. Glucose, on the other hand, is contained in sugar and is necessary especially for brain and eyes BUT glucose can be obtained from many carbs esp fruit and can also be made in the body from fat and protein.

Re: vit c Most animals, ecept humans, primates and guinea pigs, have the ability to make vit c in the body and store it. Inuit/Eskimo get vit c from eating liver and organs from such animals. Experiments have been done to prove humans can survive on a meat alone diet and not need aditional vit c. It is thought that a few people can still make some vit c in their body.

There can never be a perfect nutritional diet because everyone is individial some people may be able to make some vitamins while others can't, some people have allergies etc but having some basic knowledge about what we ought to eat and equally important what not to eat is crucial and Weezl you are helping to educate all of is in this and opening interest for many so please continue.

Ceridwen - there is too much politics in food. The white sugar, corn, soy and pharma lobbyists win everytime and make the governments conform all for greed and profit. And yes I think they are the root cause of most problems and mis information.

poohbear59

I was out Saturday and yesterday so missed the tea discussion.
We have a huge dilemma here regarding tea. We only buy fair trade and drink about 6 pots a day:eek:

I am about to go out again but wanted to say we still want to try the £100 a month menu. I know we can't drink Tesco value tea bags but if we could find our own bargain somewhere would that be acceptable? There are usually at least 5 adults here each day drinking tea each day, sometimes more. Maybe I could have a seperate budget for tea and milk for the workers during the day? Just thinking out loud.....

weezl74

SusanC wrote: »

I should add though that although I avoid sugar, I am perfectly happy for it to be included in the plan as I accept that the majority of people have different views on it and are quite happy to have it.

maltesers wrote: »

There can never be a perfect nutritional diet because everyone is individial some people may be able to make some vitamins while others can't, some people have allergies etc but having some basic knowledge about what we ought to eat and equally important what not to eat is crucial and Weezl you are helping to educate all of is in this and opening interest for many so please continue.

thank you both

I've highlighted the bits I have because I've realised that it's not people disagreeing with me that makes me want to stop doing the planner. The above posts say that they do want me to continue, and so I shall and I feel heartened.

I (perhaps mis)understood some earlier posts to mean that there were people reading who felt I shouldn't continue, if I did misunderstand then I'm sorry.

To re emphasise, I am very happy to be disagreed with. But at this point in my life it is hard for me to maintain the impetus on a project if I feel others are saying stop.

I don't mean to cause any offence by writing this, I just need to say under what circumstances I can carry on with finding enough energy for Bob and Shirley

Susan and Malteasers I will happily write more about sugar and its inclusion in the planner. Watch this space...!

xxx