Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Mainstream Eating Guidance, 1960
Options
AnnPT77
Posts: 32,170 Member
in Debate Club
There are several threads now with some speculation about mainstream eating in the 1950s/60s. I'm going to post this as a separate thread because it may be of historic interest to others. The images are from a book, "Family Meals and Hospitality", by Lewis/Peckham/Hovey, 1960 edition. It was my high school Home Economics class book.
It used 7 food groups, not intended to be exhaustive:
This is breakfast:
Lunch:
And dinner:
This is a a picture of daily menus, with some interesting hints about expected lifestyle (like the thermos bottle). Note the comment that foods outside the basic 7 groups will also be used.
FWIW.
It used 7 food groups, not intended to be exhaustive:
This is breakfast:
Lunch:
And dinner:
This is a a picture of daily menus, with some interesting hints about expected lifestyle (like the thermos bottle). Note the comment that foods outside the basic 7 groups will also be used.
FWIW.
18
Replies
-
More fun from home ec book, from 1960, a dark age when (posters on other threads allege) people didn't know why some people got fat:
20 -
7 -
1960 book, 1944 research data:
6 -
And apparently it's true that nonsense never changes:
16 -
THANK YOU3
-
I'm just impressed that you still have that book!
I was in first grade in 1960. Funny how the basics haven't changed.5 -
...and by "funny" I mean, it ain't rocket surgery.
Thanks for doing this!4 -
cmriverside wrote: »I'm just impressed that you still have that book!
I was in first grade in 1960. Funny how the basics haven't changed.
I not only have the book, I still use it: It's a very good ultra-basic cookbook, too, with basic steps and "food science 101" tips that most recipes assume you just know, tables of substitutions/equivalencies, etc.
I haven't looked at the dietary advice part in decades, so was vastly amused by things like the "myths".
They should teach this stuff in school! Oh, wait: They did.
P.S. I was probably in first grade in 1960, too. Born 1955, kindergarten at age 4. Precocious, I guess. Home ec class was around 1969-70, using the 1960 book. I don't know whether those were slower times in publishing, or whether the book's date is down to the school being in a rural poverty area. The school owned the textbooks; my copy is one my mom bought me for (I think) Christmas because I wanted it for reference.9 -
Seems this should be required reading (with some food updates to suit modern tastes in basics). I'm really impressed with it!5
-
This is brilliant! Though, that breakfast would have me covered in eczema in no time
I am a big fan of the bit where we can have two cups of ice cream a day9 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »
I am a big fan of the bit where we can have two cups of ice cream a day
I did not see that part!
Time Machine, please to take me to 1960.
To be fair, I could eat tow cups of ice cream a day and get away with it all the way up until I was about 35.
6 -
I was not alive in 1960. We still use my wife's "Practical Cookery" from college, Texas Women's University, and her favorite high school teacher was her Home Ec. teacher.
And she can't cook to save her life.2 -
Ah the good old "common sense" days. I miss them
<reaches for raspberry keytones soaked in pregnant yack urine>12 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »This is brilliant! Though, that breakfast would have me covered in eczema in no time
I am a big fan of the bit where we can have two cups of ice cream a day
That "ice cream and seafood" thing, tho. I'm just not feeling shrimp, lobster or salmon paired with ice cream.
Decent enough info for the most part. Although those protein recommendations were sure low.1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »This is brilliant! Though, that breakfast would have me covered in eczema in no time
I am a big fan of the bit where we can have two cups of ice cream a day
That "ice cream and seafood" thing, tho. I'm just not feeling shrimp, lobster or salmon paired with ice cream.
Decent enough info for the most part. Although those protein recommendations were sure low.
Myself, I found it interesting that the calorie recommendations seem relatively high, in my region, compared to current calculators: 1800 at age 65, 128 pounds.
Protein is not that far from current USDA, 0.8 for each 2 pounds now, so 51.2g for the 128lb in this book's table, but these days usually pinned at 46g for women vs. 58g in this book's table. (I agree with you that all of that is too low in reality, BTW - I shoot for 100g+ at 120lb ideal weight).2 -
Love this, since I started high school in 1960. My high school didn't offer home economics, so this book is new to me.
The calorie recommendations do seem high.1 -
Thank you for posting, I enjoyed reading it!1
-
Is 5'9" the average height of men? My brain got stuck on the 154 lbs for men column.0
-
Fun thread!3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions