Is a healthy diet more expensive?

-taff

theoretica said:

I think there are a number of diets people pretty much agree are healthy and varied - trouble is they often are not what people want to eat, or can easily eat.  Eg Okinawan.  And indeed with changing farming practices, the nutrition of individual foods has changed over time.

That's a new one on me. I have just spent a lovely ten minutes reading about this diet and it sounds lovely, also the social lifestyle they mention which has to have some kind of influence.

I used to work for a pharmaceutical firm, who's pratices could be a bit iffy in the early days when PPE was a dirty word. Twenty five percent of us who worked in a specific department across all shifts have all developed some kind of cancer or tumours. We can't prove it's related because they're all different ones so we just mutter away to no-one and nothing about it. Your lifestyle also plays a significant part in health was my point I think. [Across all other deparments it's very very much less]

Farway

trailingspouse said:

-taff said:

Now if everyone could agree on what a healthy and varied diet was, that would be a bit of a breakthrough...

Ain't that the truth. Also - why do we allow manufacturers to make (and retailers to sell) 'food' that is demonstrably bad for us?

Maybe because it's a free country & we are considered to be adults capable of making our own choices in what we buy and eat?

If you disagree, maybe we should also remove voting rights from those too thick unable to choose what to buy while an elite few select what foods the plebs can have?

Doom_and_Gloom

theoretica said:

-taff said:

Now if everyone could agree on what a healthy and varied diet was, that would be a bit of a breakthrough...

I think there are a number of diets people pretty much agree are healthy and varied - trouble is they often are not what people want to eat, or can easily eat.  Eg Okinawan.  And indeed with changing farming practices, the nutrition of individual foods has changed over time.

Amazing how you mention traditional Okinawan food as being soo healthy. I say traditional as they have been having a food/health crisis since about the 90s with the accessibility of fast foods and non traditional foods and while those that achieve 90-100+ in age is still high that generation are outliving the one after it! A true eye opener to healthy diet and living being shown to change to one not healthy and the consequence with just a generation or two. 

The majority of their traditional diet is sweet potato and rice. Then vegetables (seasonal), legumes and soy, other grains with some fruits (again seasonal). A small amount of nuts, seaweeds, oils etc are also consumed. This means that meat, dairy, eggs and other animal products are eaten very sparingly usually making up to under 5% of the diet overall, if at all. Indeed traditional Okinawan meat is usually fish, not beef, chicken, pork etc which most traditionally rarely eat if they do at all. 

This means a good chunk, possibly 2/3rds, of the traditional diet is carbohydrates. It is mostly plant based and seasonal produce is preferred for maximum flavour and nutrition.

That is my goal diet as much as possible but in a 100% vegan way. 

I wouldn't call the above an overly expensive way to eat. Miso, seaweeds, nuts etc can cost quite a lot initially but they last for quite a while also making them rather affordable I find. Carbohydrates, even wholegrain, are rather cheap. Vegetables are in general cheap. Pulses/legumes are also cheap etc.
It is meats, dairy, eggs etc, basically the products that Okinawans consume the least of that are generally expensive.

If you eat nutritionally dense foods you are less likely to want to eat more keeping costs down.
With foods that are nutritionally lacking you are likely to eat more as your body is after the nutrition you lack which in the end costs more.

As to the comments previously about multivitamins etc for vegans (along with multi vitamin and some others I also take a vegan D3  but as I live in England basically everyone is recommended to take that during winter as a minimum due to lack of sun exposure), I do personally take them, not consistently I'll admit, as I have a disabilities and health issues that come with them so try to cover my bases. They all cost me less than £7 a month if I was to take them consistently every day but I probably remember three out of seven days in all honesty so more around £3/month which isn't exactly expensive.
Last blood test, where I forgot to take them for about a week before hand, came back perfectly fine. I've been vegan for over 17 years so anything wrong would likely have shown up by now.

KxMx

Farway said:

trailingspouse said:

-taff said:

Now if everyone could agree on what a healthy and varied diet was, that would be a bit of a breakthrough...

Ain't that the truth. Also - why do we allow manufacturers to make (and retailers to sell) 'food' that is demonstrably bad for us?

Maybe because it's a free country & we are considered to be adults capable of making our own choices in what we buy and eat?

If you disagree, maybe we should also remove voting rights from those too thick unable to choose what to buy while an elite few select what foods the plebs can have?

Honestly I was against the sugar tax on fizzy drinks before it came in, but since them I'm firmly in favour. 
Manufacturers reformulated with less sugar to avoid the tax, fast food chains only serving sugar free, etc.
Net positive benefits. 

Mum is diabetic and needed some added sugar, non cola drinks recently, I had no end of trouble finding a Sprite/7up/lemonade that wasn't sugar free!

I enjoy takeaways myself on a semi regular basis, but what I'd like to ban is those double/triple burger meals that calorie wise far exceed the daily recommended intake. Absolutely no need for such gluttony and at such a vast number of calories, you can't even consider it a treat. 

joedenise

KxMx said:

Farway said:

trailingspouse said:

-taff said:

Now if everyone could agree on what a healthy and varied diet was, that would be a bit of a breakthrough...

Ain't that the truth. Also - why do we allow manufacturers to make (and retailers to sell) 'food' that is demonstrably bad for us?

Maybe because it's a free country & we are considered to be adults capable of making our own choices in what we buy and eat?

If you disagree, maybe we should also remove voting rights from those too thick unable to choose what to buy while an elite few select what foods the plebs can have?

Honestly I was against the sugar tax on fizzy drinks before it came in, but since them I'm firmly in favour. 
Manufacturers reformulated with less sugar to avoid the tax, fast food chains only serving sugar free, etc.
Net positive benefits. 

Mum is diabetic and needed some added sugar, non cola drinks recently, I had no end of trouble finding a Sprite/7up/lemonade that wasn't sugar free!

I enjoy takeaways myself on a semi regular basis, but what I'd like to ban is those double/triple burger meals that calorie wise far exceed the daily recommended intake. Absolutely no need for such gluttony and at such a vast number of calories, you can't even consider it a treat. 

Quite agree.  I'd even go as far as to say they ought to sell them without the bun at a reduced price!  Can't stand the buns - they just go soggy!  I'd far rather just have the burger and eat it with a knife and fork!

jackieblack

joedenise said:

KxMx said:

Farway said:

trailingspouse said:

-taff said:

Now if everyone could agree on what a healthy and varied diet was, that would be a bit of a breakthrough...

Ain't that the truth. Also - why do we allow manufacturers to make (and retailers to sell) 'food' that is demonstrably bad for us?

Maybe because it's a free country & we are considered to be adults capable of making our own choices in what we buy and eat?

If you disagree, maybe we should also remove voting rights from those too thick unable to choose what to buy while an elite few select what foods the plebs can have?

Honestly I was against the sugar tax on fizzy drinks before it came in, but since them I'm firmly in favour. 
Manufacturers reformulated with less sugar to avoid the tax, fast food chains only serving sugar free, etc.
Net positive benefits. 

Mum is diabetic and needed some added sugar, non cola drinks recently, I had no end of trouble finding a Sprite/7up/lemonade that wasn't sugar free!

I enjoy takeaways myself on a semi regular basis, but what I'd like to ban is those double/triple burger meals that calorie wise far exceed the daily recommended intake. Absolutely no need for such gluttony and at such a vast number of calories, you can't even consider it a treat. 

Quite agree.  I'd even go as far as to say they ought to sell them without the bun at a reduced price!  Can't stand the buns - they just go soggy!  I'd far rather just have the burger and eat it with a knife and fork!

I don’t know about other outlets, but in McDonalds, you can order any burger without the bun and they provide a knife and fork. (I have gone occasionally when out with my daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter) 

joedenise

Thank you I didn't know that.  Will keep in mind for the future.  Only really use McD's when we use services on the motorway which isn't very often.

theoretica

It would be unpopular, but rationing apparently increased health...

trailingspouse

Farway said:

Maybe because it's a free country & we are considered to be adults capable of making our own choices in what we buy and eat?

If you disagree, maybe we should also remove voting rights from those too thick unable to choose what to buy while an elite few select what foods the plebs can have?

With 63.8% of the UK population either overweight or obese, we're obviously not capable of making sensible choices. When you go to the supermarket there is aisle after aisle of food that is basically bad for us - why? Simply because it is profitable - absolutely no other reason.

-taff

theoretica said:

It would be unpopular, but rationing apparently increased health...

It did. But it also was a very different lifestyle then, much more physical, which we don't have now.