Are the poor fat?
Replies
-
The sale price for tomatoes is 99 cents per lb. They don't sell them per each usually. I don't buy iceberg lettuce so I don't know the cost of it, but when romaine is in season you can find it for a dollar or dollar twenty five a lbs if you shop around. Asparagus is on sale this week for a $1.99 lbs. Occasionally it drops to $1.49, but that's usually when the crops are very very thin and "wimpy". they don't taste as good. But I get them anyway.
Prices vary greatly here. I don't pay the same as my brother who lives on the other side of the country. Some better and some worse.
I did pretty good yesterday
3lb bag tangelos, (3.99)
2 containers fresh broccoli.carrot mix (1.49 each)
1 container fresh broccoli slaw (1.49)
2 containers fresh green beans (1.49 each)
1 loaf rye bread (1.49)
1/2lb salami (like 5 dollars)
6 donuts and 4 turnover pastries (3.00)
= $22.18
Not enough for a week or anything, but we were out of oranges for my son's lunch.
Everything but the oranges and lunch meat was a markdown so about half price, i am forgetting something.
This will all be gone by the weekend.0 -
While I have travelled across the US it was when I was 8 and we didn't pay much attention to prices of grocieries.
When I checked on google I was surprised to see prices varied across the country - in a UK supermarket it is the same for the same product in that chain anywhere (but they are careful to only have the more expensive lines in smaller ones generally) - however as we're smaller than some of your states, logistical issues are a little different!0 -
The sale price for tomatoes is 99 cents per lb. They don't sell them per each usually. I don't buy iceberg lettuce so I don't know the cost of it, but when romaine is in season you can find it for a dollar or dollar twenty five a lbs if you shop around. Asparagus is on sale this week for a $1.99 lbs. Occasionally it drops to $1.49, but that's usually when the crops are very very thin and "wimpy". they don't taste as good. But I get them anyway.
Prices vary greatly here. I don't pay the same as my brother who lives on the other side of the country. Some better and some worse.
I did pretty good yesterday
3lb bag tangelos, (3.99)
2 containers fresh broccoli.carrot mix (1.49 each)
1 container fresh broccoli slaw (1.49)
2 containers fresh green beans (1.49 each)
1 loaf rye bread (1.49)
1/2lb salami (like 5 dollars)
6 donuts and 4 turnover pastries (3.00)
= $22.18
Not enough for a week or anything, but we were out of oranges for my son's lunch.
Everything but the oranges and lunch meat was a markdown so about half price, i am forgetting something.
This will all be gone by the weekend.
Why do you spend so much money on fresh stuff in the winter? Just my thoughts, but I would not have purchased any of those things. Instead of the fancy citrus fruit, I would get bananas for 44 cents a pound, or maybe a lemon or lime to add to my water, one wedge at a time. Canned or frozen veggies are pennies compared to fresh this time of year. The bread is reasonable, but then 1/2 pound of deli meat for $5? Why not bologna or chopped ham for less than half that? Or peanut butter & jelly? I also would have chosen Little Debbie snack cakes over the pastries, or better yet, the store brand of snack cakes for about fifty cents a box less than the Little Debbies.0 -
Prices in the US can vary depending on what side of town you are on. I never shop in the west part of my town - prices on everything are higher (higher income area of town) - gas is typically a nickel more/gal. out there too!
Also - remember - depending on your budget - you really are going to buy what is going to feed you the longest (not just the healthiest). I can go spend $20 on fruit and veggies for a week (which is not full meals - just sides or snacks) - or if that is my entire budget I can buy 3 pounds of pasta/a 1/2 pound of hamb/a smoked sausage ring/3 cans of pasta sauce and a gallon of milk /a dozen eggs/a few cans of bean and a loaf of store brand white bread. - gets boring after a few days, but we ALL get to eat WHOLE meals for a week. Or in my neighbor's case - see if Banquet TV dinners are on sale and get 20-25 TV Dinners (I never did understand that - but its what she did)
It's all relative to what you know and how many meals that $20 has to last.0 -
The sale price for tomatoes is 99 cents per lb. They don't sell them per each usually. I don't buy iceberg lettuce so I don't know the cost of it, but when romaine is in season you can find it for a dollar or dollar twenty five a lbs if you shop around. Asparagus is on sale this week for a $1.99 lbs. Occasionally it drops to $1.49, but that's usually when the crops are very very thin and "wimpy". they don't taste as good. But I get them anyway.
Prices vary greatly here. I don't pay the same as my brother who lives on the other side of the country. Some better and some worse.
I did pretty good yesterday
3lb bag tangelos, (3.99)
2 containers fresh broccoli.carrot mix (1.49 each)
1 container fresh broccoli slaw (1.49)
2 containers fresh green beans (1.49 each)
1 loaf rye bread (1.49)
1/2lb salami (like 5 dollars)
6 donuts and 4 turnover pastries (3.00)
= $22.18
Not enough for a week or anything, but we were out of oranges for my son's lunch.
Everything but the oranges and lunch meat was a markdown so about half price, i am forgetting something.
This will all be gone by the weekend.
Why do you spend so much money on fresh stuff in the winter? Just my thoughts, but I would not have purchased any of those things. Instead of the fancy citrus fruit, I would get bananas for 44 cents a pound, or maybe a lemon or lime to add to my water, one wedge at a time. Canned or frozen veggies are pennies compared to fresh this time of year. The bread is reasonable, but then 1/2 pound of deli meat for $5? Why not bologna or chopped ham for less than half that? Or peanut butter & jelly? I also would have chosen Little Debbie snack cakes over the pastries, or better yet, the store brand of snack cakes for about fifty cents a box less than the Little Debbies.
Why buy pastries at all?
I agree with the rest, though. Tangelos?
And, I would skip garbage lunchemat alltogether. A rotisserie chicken is about the same price and a whole lot more food for the money. And, the ACME I used to live by used to sell them half price on Thursdays, which was a slow day for them. I would leave with 5 or 6 - one for us, one for the pets, and the rest would either get frozen for later or given away to someone who could use the free meal.0 -
The sale price for tomatoes is 99 cents per lb. They don't sell them per each usually. I don't buy iceberg lettuce so I don't know the cost of it, but when romaine is in season you can find it for a dollar or dollar twenty five a lbs if you shop around. Asparagus is on sale this week for a $1.99 lbs. Occasionally it drops to $1.49, but that's usually when the crops are very very thin and "wimpy". they don't taste as good. But I get them anyway.
Prices vary greatly here. I don't pay the same as my brother who lives on the other side of the country. Some better and some worse.
I did pretty good yesterday
3lb bag tangelos, (3.99)
2 containers fresh broccoli.carrot mix (1.49 each)
1 container fresh broccoli slaw (1.49)
2 containers fresh green beans (1.49 each)
1 loaf rye bread (1.49)
1/2lb salami (like 5 dollars)
6 donuts and 4 turnover pastries (3.00)
= $22.18
Not enough for a week or anything, but we were out of oranges for my son's lunch.
Everything but the oranges and lunch meat was a markdown so about half price, i am forgetting something.
This will all be gone by the weekend.
Why do you spend so much money on fresh stuff in the winter? Just my thoughts, but I would not have purchased any of those things. Instead of the fancy citrus fruit, I would get bananas for 44 cents a pound, or maybe a lemon or lime to add to my water, one wedge at a time. Canned or frozen veggies are pennies compared to fresh this time of year. The bread is reasonable, but then 1/2 pound of deli meat for $5? Why not bologna or chopped ham for less than half that? Or peanut butter & jelly? I also would have chosen Little Debbie snack cakes over the pastries, or better yet, the store brand of snack cakes for about fifty cents a box less than the Little Debbies.
Why buy pastries at all?
I agree with the rest, though. Tangelos?
And, I would skip garbage lunchemat alltogether. A rotisserie chicken is about the same price and a whole lot more food for the money. And, the ACME I used to live by used to sell them half price on Thursdays, which was a slow day for them. I would leave with 5 or 6 - one for us, one for the pets, and the rest would either get frozen for later or given away to someone who could use the free meal.
Because pastries taste good.
Lunch meat is also cheap, and it is not "garbage." The package it comes in becomes garbage once it's empty, but the meat inside is proteins and fats. Again, I eat for nutrients, not for some subjective vision of health.
I do buy whole chickens for roasting, but I don't pay them to cook it for me.0 -
There are ways to cut down what you spend on groceries. I'm not trying to sacrifice health for money, there does come a point when you are sacrificing one for the other. I've already given up eating organic due to cost. I'm personally not going to start eating more unhealthy foods just to save a dollar. But the truly poor will. It's really a shame that little debbies are so much less expensive then real food. It promotes unhealthy choices. Now i can look up recipes, I can go into my kitchen and cook. I didn't always have that luxury, a lot of people do not. I no longer work ridiculous crazy hours and now have the time to cook and learn how to make dinners. I've also learned that my son and I will not eat things we don't like. So if I purchase hot dogs that are not all beef, they will waste away in the freezer. And that is also an important part of it. If I was starving, i'd hold my nose and eat them, but thankfully I am not.
Tangelos are in season.. it runs through the end of May if I remember correctly.. they are not fancy citrus fruit, they are a variation of oranges. They are more expensive per lbs then bananas, but they will last a lot longer. My son will not eat navel oranges, the only less expensive ones in the store this week.
Each of those containers are 16 oz ... so that's a pretty good deal for them. The dollar frozen veggie bags are usually 8 or 12oz right? So I actually spent less on veggies then I would have. I usually get the really big bags at Sams though, it's usually cheaper. I can't choke down canned veggies, and will opt not to eat veggies over eating canned ones.
oh and I returned the salami, because they gave me the boars head and I didn't catch it before paying. So my son is eating leftovers for lunch at school. So you can subtract 5 bucks out of that total.
I think this is spot on. I would add how much the people you are trying to feed eat. When my son is not here, my food bill drops tremendously. By more then half. Because I do not eat nearly as much as he does. I do not need to.It's all relative to what you know and how many meals that $20 has to last.0 -
How many are 'truly poor' and don't have the time to cook, also?
In the UK, whatever people say....
Well, I was goint to say it's hard to be poor if you have a job.
But even if you don't, not having money is generally because you choose to spend it on a more expensive house to live. However, of course our government provides rather a lot of support.
Me, I'm hoping the time I hit the supermarket after my run tonight will be about right for the roasts chickens to be down to £2 or so for a whole one. Dog(s) get the scraps and sometimes stew the bones up and give the resulting soup to the dog(s) too.0 -
Another thought just occurred to me too. A friend of mine was complaining about all the goodies at her work place that people bring in. I remember when I worked back then, the break room would have food people brought in to snack on. It was never healthy and I'd eat a lot of it, because I was hungry and not eating regular meals or regularly. So the boss/co-worker brought in donuts/cookies/danish/sandwiches/etc.., i'd be the jerk who hate half of them before anyone else got any. Opportunity to eat was never passed by. If someone offered me the rest of their lunch that they couldn't finish i'd eat it, even if it was comprised of garbage foods.
.
We have that here at work, there is a lot of times left over food we serve to committee that come in for meetings. Even though I have eaten, the fact that its there, free for the taking, and actually looks pretty good, i wouild eat it. Its something about free food laying around that gets me, kinda like a buffet is so appealing. we can truly overeat when its all out there free for the taking.0 -
When I was living at the shelter last summer, I sometimes ate upwards of 4 doughnuts in a sitting, plus large helpings of whatever they gave us for dinner. I still was not fat. I've had good knowledge of nutrition most of my life, and the times I've gained weight we the Times when I didn't really care. I gained weight since moving out of the homeless shelter into a more stable program because my roommate was a violent thief and using my food stamps to buy a pint of ice cream and locking myself in my room felt safer than taking the time to cook fresh meals, even though I'm an awesome cook and love my veggies.
Just another dirt poor pov...0 -
Because pastries taste good.
Lunch meat is also cheap, and it is not "garbage." The package it comes in becomes garbage once it's empty, but the meat inside is proteins and fats. Again, I eat for nutrients, not for some subjective vision of health.
I do buy whole chickens for roasting, but I don't pay them to cook it for me.
Pastries taste good if that's what you've been conditioned to eat. If you hailed from a place with real poverty and had never tasted one, you're actually less likely to like them - overwhelmingly.
But, my point in asking the question is that those were the least necessary and least nutritive on the list, yet not what was questioned as far as money expenditure. I probably would opt for bananas or small apples in bulk over the tangelos, but I wouldn't question that expenditure over premade pastries.
Lunch meat of the variety you described and the OP described very much is garbage. The package it comes in has no more chemicals and colorings, though somewhat less protein. For that same money, you get a large portion of artifical preservatives that disrupt proper brain chemistry and function and "lunch meat" will have cost you more than buying the actual precooked meat from which it is partially made. That's not eating for nutrients, that's eating for emotional satisfaction. Period.
And, just FYI, the "precooked" rotisserie chickens I purchased were $3 less per bird than the similarly sized uncooked variety in the frozen section. those I bought on sale when they were less than 60 cents/lb. - and I didn't cook most of them.
This discussion has taken a number of turns, so people are posting all sorts of shopping lists without making clear the intent behind them. For the benefit of all, really, people should be prefacing their posts on what they buy/eat with whether or not they consider themselves poor and/or themselves or family members fat (I would say overweight, obese, etc. but I didn't ttile th discussion) and what their priorities are when they make that list (money savings, enjoyment, focus on a particular marco). Otherwise, this discussion goes round and round to no good end.0 -
Because pastries taste good.
Lunch meat is also cheap, and it is not "garbage." The package it comes in becomes garbage once it's empty, but the meat inside is proteins and fats. Again, I eat for nutrients, not for some subjective vision of health.
I do buy whole chickens for roasting, but I don't pay them to cook it for me.
Pastries taste good if that's what you've been conditioned to eat. If you hailed from a place with real poverty and had never tasted one, you're actually less likely to like them - overwhelmingly.
But, my point in asking the question is that those were the least necessary and least nutritive on the list, yet not what was questioned as far as money expenditure. I probably would opt for bananas or small apples in bulk over the tangelos, but I wouldn't question that expenditure over premade pastries.
Lunch meat of the variety you described and the OP described very much is garbage. The package it comes in has no more chemicals and colorings, though somewhat less protein. For that same money, you get a large portion of artifical preservatives that disrupt proper brain chemistry and function and "lunch meat" will have cost you more than buying the actual precooked meat from which it is partially made. That's not eating for nutrients, that's eating for emotional satisfaction. Period.
And, just FYI, the "precooked" rotisserie chickens I purchased were $3 less per bird than the similarly sized uncooked variety in the frozen section. those I bought on sale when they were less than 60 cents/lb. - and I didn't cook most of them.
This discussion has taken a number of turns, so people are posting all sorts of shopping lists without making clear the intent behind them. For the benefit of all, really, people should be prefacing their posts on what they buy/eat with whether or not they consider themselves poor and/or themselves or family members fat (I would say overweight, obese, etc. but I didn't ttile th discussion) and what their priorities are when they make that list (money savings, enjoyment, focus on a particular marco). Otherwise, this discussion goes round and round to no good end.
Still singing the same, off-key tune. :laugh:
0 -
When I was living at the shelter last summer, I sometimes ate upwards of 4 doughnuts in a sitting, plus large helpings of whatever they gave us for dinner. I still was not fat.
What kind of dinners did they serve you?
This thread makes me think of my time working in homeless shelter (for about ten years, inner-city Toronto). Our kitchen was not healthy at all. The cooks had no health knowledge at all. In fact, most of the cooks probably had no training period.
All the kitchen cared about (and I can see why) was getting out as much food as they needed as cheaply as possible. I remember it being carb heavy, not lean cuts of meat often and fresh veggies were only available when donated (which was relatively often to be fair).
Between meals people got sandwiches (all they could eat) which were 85% bread with small amount of meat. Or anything donated from local businesses - which were usually better sandwiches or "treats".
I think it would be hard to "be healthy" in that scenario - but I wouldn't say the population I dealt with was any fatter on average than non homeless people. (albeit there were substance abuse and mental health issues for a percentage of people - but thats true for people with money too.)0 -
The "poor" get food supplement (Food stamps, wic etc.) It is the lower middle class that cut out more expensive foods. Avocado are near $1.00 each. Those are luxury items for most lower middle class... A bag of mandarin oranges are $5.00, and so they are bought in limited quantities. Healthy eating is not as cheap, as ramen noodle, but then again neither is a trip to the Dr. for the lack of nutrition. I think convenience is more of an issue. If it's cheap and easy we will fore go healthy choices for convenience.
Exactly!0 -
I'm sorry, I dunno how much money/foodstamps poor people in the US get, but in Canada - they are far far far worse off than the lower middle class.
In fact the imaginary battle between the truly poor, the working poor...and I guess now the "lower middle class" is silly in general. These are the groups of people who should be sticking together IMO.0 -
The "poor" get food supplement (Food stamps, wic etc.) It is the lower middle class that cut out more expensive foods. Avocado are near $1.00 each. Those are luxury items for most lower middle class... A bag of mandarin oranges are $5.00, and so they are bought in limited quantities. Healthy eating is not as cheap, as ramen noodle, but then again neither is a trip to the Dr. for the lack of nutrition. I think convenience is more of an issue. If it's cheap and easy we will fore go healthy choices for convenience.
Exactly!
hmm.. not exactly.. I couldn't get food stamps when I worked a part time min wage job and didn't' have a home. That was with a baby to care for. In hind site, I probably should have quit, taken all the state benefits and focused on school. But that's a completely different issue. The rest I agree with. Oh.. medical care is free if you can't afford it.. So technically, its' cheaper to go to the doctor (er/clinic).. speaking from a financial standpoint strictly. Charity care is available to all, regardless of income or reason for being there. With a poverty level income you'd qualify for 100% coverage of your medical bills. Not to mention, anything not covered isn't going to be paid. if you can't really afford to eat, you're not going to pay the doctor for treating you.
I get what you're saying. however here, if you work you qualify for much much less help, if you are considered lower middle class you likely qualify for nothing while barely making ends meet. The working poor and lower middle class are much closer in situations then the poor is to either classification. I guess i would have been considered working poor at that time, since I had a job. But I was proud to have that job and proud to be trying to dig myself out of the hole I was in. I wouldn't have wanted to be associated with those who live off welfare or on the states dime. In my opinion, that slight difference is a big difference mentally.In fact the imaginary battle between the truly poor, the working poor...and I guess now the "lower middle class" is silly in general. These are the groups of people who should be sticking together IMO.
well I didn't have a stove, or fridge, or home at that time.. so cooking was out of the question anyway.How many are 'truly poor' and don't have the time to cook, also?
When I was working poor, I did have those things and an 80 hour per week job with a rent payment that was nearly 3/4 of my take home pay.. I bought very cheap, inexpensive food and skipped a lot of meals.0 -
I get what you're saying. however here, if you work you qualify for much much less help, if you are considered lower middle class you likely qualify for nothing while barely making ends meet. The working poor and lower middle class are much closer in situations then the poor is to either classification. I guess i would have been considered working poor at that time, since I had a job. But I was proud to have that job and proud to be trying to dig myself out of the hole I was in. I wouldn't have wanted to be associated with those who live off welfare or on the states dime. In my opinion, that slight difference is a big difference mentally.
Yeah that is essentially how it works here - at a certain point of hours worked you can't get benefits at all. My point is I find it silly for people who are either working poor or "lower middle class" to disparagingly remark about the benefits people even MORE poor than they are are getting.
And from my experience - most poor people (even on welfare) - are trying to dig themselves out of a hole. I agree not everyone sadly - but from my decade of interactions with tens of thousands of poor people - the majority are trying to do the same thing as you really.
Really nothing to do with this thread though so I will drop it, have always just found that dynamic interesting. Like the people that showed the most disdain towards the homeless people I worked with - were the people in a social class JUST above them. Always fascinated me.0 -
Still singing the same, off-key tune. :laugh:
I will, predictably, call BS when you argue poverty constricts your choices but you'll spend more money on less nutritious foods because they provide mental happiness in place of sustenance. That's not poverty dictating choices, that's just poor decision making.0 -
Still singing the same, off-key tune. :laugh:
I will, predictably, call BS when you argue poverty constricts your choices but you'll spend more money on less nutritious foods because they provide mental happiness in place of sustenance. That's not poverty dictating choices, that's just poor decision making.
And clearly not been paying ANY attention to my posts. I have consistently stated quite the opposite of what you are claiming that I have "argued." I call BS on your forum skills.0 -
I will, predictably, call BS when you argue poverty constricts your choices but you'll spend more money on less nutritious foods because they provide mental happiness in place of sustenance. That's not poverty dictating choices, that's just poor decision making.
I get the general point you are making - but I think ignoring mental happiness and personal preference is actually bad advice for most people when it comes to optimal health. Obviously, you can't rely fully on mental happiness or preference (thats how many of us got where we are) but ignoring it or dismissing it is equally wrong and potentially counter productive.0 -
I get what you're saying. however here, if you work you qualify for much much less help, if you are considered lower middle class you likely qualify for nothing while barely making ends meet. The working poor and lower middle class are much closer in situations then the poor is to either classification. I guess i would have been considered working poor at that time, since I had a job. But I was proud to have that job and proud to be trying to dig myself out of the hole I was in. I wouldn't have wanted to be associated with those who live off welfare or on the states dime. In my opinion, that slight difference is a big difference mentally.
Yeah that is essentially how it works here - at a certain point of hours worked you can't get benefits at all. My point is I find it silly for people who are either working poor or "lower middle class" to disparagingly remark about the benefits people even MORE poor than they are are getting.
And from my experience - most poor people (even on welfare) - are trying to dig themselves out of a hole. I agree not everyone sadly - but from my decade of interactions with tens of thousands of poor people - the majority are trying to do the same thing as you really.
Really nothing to do with this thread though so I will drop it, have always just found that dynamic interesting. Like the people that showed the most disdain towards the homeless people I worked with - were the people in a social class JUST above them. Always fascinated me.
They resent them in many cases. They don't feel fortunate to not be that bad off because overall, they tend to feel like they work harder to get to the same place. In some cases, they're correct.
Who blasts me for giving money to a homeless person? The working poor. And the spend-before-saving folks. Never the people in the highest tax brackets.
Who thinks I should not have used the Starbucks app on my phone to buy a sandwich for a homeless man I encountered on my run? (I only had a gel, my ID, and my phone, no money at all) Those same groups.
It's a sad comment on the loss of a sense community.0 -
Yeah that was my gut feeling too. And it is def a bit sad to me as well0
-
When I was living at the shelter last summer, I sometimes ate upwards of 4 doughnuts in a sitting, plus large helpings of whatever they gave us for dinner. I still was not fat.
What kind of dinners did they serve you?
This thread makes me think of my time working in homeless shelter (for about ten years, inner-city Toronto). Our kitchen was not healthy at all. The cooks had no health knowledge at all. In fact, most of the cooks probably had no training period.
All the kitchen cared about (and I can see why) was getting out as much food as they needed as cheaply as possible. I remember it being carb heavy, not lean cuts of meat often and fresh veggies were only available when donated (which was relatively often to be fair).
Between meals people got sandwiches (all they could eat) which were 85% bread with small amount of meat. Or anything donated from local businesses - which were usually better sandwiches or "treats".
I think it would be hard to "be healthy" in that scenario - but I wouldn't say the population I dealt with was any fatter on average than non homeless people. (albeit there were substance abuse and mental health issues for a percentage of people - but thats true for people with money too.)
Dinner was cooked by whomever was keeping an eye on us that night. It was usually a cheap cut off meat, overcooked, with soggy canned veggies and instant potatoes or rice. Sometimes spaghetti with meat sauce. One day, some old ladies brought in a mall for us with a fresh pasta salad. We ate everything with gusto, except that thing which was definitely NOT shepherd's pie!
Dessert was cake or pie or other donated baked goods. A fight almost broke out when we got a small portion of fresh fruit to share. Cantaloupe was our caviar!
We were out of the house from 5:45am-4pm. The soup kitchen usually had salads, and I would often eat 2 or 3 when others didn't want theirs. But it wasn't so busy for breakfast, so I would fill up on doughnuts and save myself the noise and anxiety.
Even though I still need the food bank, I'm thinking of volunteering at one while waiting for my job training. I'm so bored.0 -
Please provide some back up for the claim it is 'garbage'.Lunch meat of the variety you described and the OP described very much is garbage. The package it comes in has no more chemicals and colorings, though somewhat less protein.
The packaging probably has a lot less 'chemicals'. You will find the widest range of 'chemicals' in food that is 'grown' by nature rather than food produced from more base elements in a factory - though often the base elements are seperated from items grown in nature.
Please provide some decent evidence for this, too. Cheap processed meats tend to be reformed from scraps which couldn't be sold at a higher price point to those that believe said non-continuous bits of meat have less nutritional value.For that same money, you get a large portion of artifical preservatives that disrupt proper brain chemistry and function and "lunch meat" will have cost you more than buying the actual precooked meat from which it is partially made.
(See all the ****wittery over the so called 'pink slime'.)
No need to discuss that it's your "time of the month" herePeriod.
.
As for pasties - I was brought up on very basic food generally. VERY occasionally we might get a meat pie from a snack van (say once a month) - this was in Papua New Guinea where they didn't really 'do' burgers or hot dogs. I still have a taste for pasties and lots of other foods I never had as a kid. Turns out you CAN like food you haven't tried before!
I'm not sure if the pastie-eater was actually trying to eat super-cheap anyway?0 -
Still singing the same, off-key tune. :laugh:
I will, predictably, call BS when you argue poverty constricts your choices but you'll spend more money on less nutritious foods because they provide mental happiness in place of sustenance. That's not poverty dictating choices, that's just poor decision making.
And clearly not been paying ANY attention to my posts. I have consistently stated quite the opposite of what you are claiming that I have "argued." I call BS on your forum skills.
Yes, forum skills. Too bad universities teach those pesky career skills instead of "forum skills" or I could be rationalizing my way out of poor choices. Of course, I still couldn't top your stellar performance of mass confusion or intoxication leading to the brilliant conclusion that anemia requires increased calorie consumption
You claim to be asserting that one can eat healthy even when poor. People on limited incomes follow with interest. Then you post anything but healthy foods on a budget and whine about "subjective health."0 -
Please provide some back up for the claim it is 'garbage'.
The packaging probably has a lot less 'chemicals'. You will find the widest range of 'chemicals' in food that is 'grown' by nature rather than food produced from more base elements in a factory - though often the base elements are seperated from items grown in nature.
For starters, 100g of salami has more than 4 times the sodium content of the same amount of rotisserie chicken breast, which incidentally has twice the protein, at multiples of the cost as well. That's before the artificial colorings added as well as artificial flavors.
Please provide some decent evidence for this, too. Cheap processed meats tend to be reformed from scraps which couldn't be sold at a higher price point to those that believe said non-continuous bits of meat have less nutritional value.For that same money, you get a large portion of artifical preservatives that disrupt proper brain chemistry and function and "lunch meat" will have cost you more than buying the actual precooked meat from which it is partially made.
(See all the ****wittery over the so called 'pink slime'.)
Read any of the literature on ADHD and Bipolar disorder and why psychitrists caution against their use in people in either of those categories.
Well, the fallout from "pink slime" resulting from washing beef inspected and failed as unfit for human consumption with ammonium hydroxide was a more an issue not of what food contained, but the process being classified as a "component in a production procedure" and thus not warranting disclosure of its addition to the food - as well as the fact that it was not done in South American or European markets. It may be gross, but it is McDonald's so I'm not sure that could really be a surprise to anyone. Still people tend not ro react better to withholding information vs. outright lying.As for pasties - I was brought up on very basic food generally. VERY occasionally we might get a meat pie from a snack van (say once a month) - this was in Papua New Guinea where they didn't really 'do' burgers or hot dogs. I still have a taste for pasties and lots of other foods I never had as a kid. Turns out you CAN like food you haven't tried before!
I'm not sure if the pastie-eater was actually trying to eat super-cheap anyway?
Stick to discussing food. Items for personal modesty are certainly not making people fat. And, if they were, there's always good old bandaids.0 -
I will, predictably, call BS when you argue poverty constricts your choices but you'll spend more money on less nutritious foods because they provide mental happiness in place of sustenance. That's not poverty dictating choices, that's just poor decision making.
I get the general point you are making - but I think ignoring mental happiness and personal preference is actually bad advice for most people when it comes to optimal health. Obviously, you can't rely fully on mental happiness or preference (thats how many of us got where we are) but ignoring it or dismissing it is equally wrong and potentially counter productive.
Poor people don't eat for mental happiness and personal preference. They eat to stay alive. There might be some people here who have been poor, but no one posting here now is actually poor. They may be economically disadvantaged, or living paycheck to paycheck, but the truly poor don't have the luxury of deciding a particular food will produce more mental happiness than another. They eat what is available and will keep them alive. People factor in happiness when they begin to have the economic flexibility to do so. As demonstrated here, some of them do that to great excess.0 -
Also, people allergic to peanuts could die from ingesting them.Read any of the literature on ADHD and Bipolar disorder and why psychitrists caution against their use in people in either of those categories.
So peanuts are a fatal poison no one should eat?
Ammonium hydroxide is naturally found in beef too, I believe. It's also used to make cheese and various other things.
Yet people aren't worried until "pink slime" is bandied around.
There's no wonder such things aren't explained when it's a target for pop-alarmism.
As it was, a meat that was low in fat and high protein, cheap AND lest wasteful was removed because of said alarmism. I do not believe there was any health issues with it.0 -
Also, people allergic to peanuts could die from ingesting them.
So peanuts are a fatal poison no one should eat?
Not a very apt analogy. A peanut allergy only affects people with a certain defect. A healthy person consuming a handful of peanuts is not the equivalent of a person consuming nearly an entire day's allowance of sodium in just 100 grams - about 4 regular slices - of their daily food intake.
The additives in lunchmeat are harmful generally, and a poor substitute for less expensive full meat products. It just so happens that with certain classes of people with already heightened mental dysfunction experience a more significant disruption. Marijuana is contraindicated for similar reasons (though obviously not a food unless you bake it in a brownie or such). ADHD and Bipolar meds aren't cheap, so it would be quite foolish to consume something that decreases affectiveness and increases sensitivity. Many people on both types of medication are directly subsidized by the pharmaceutical companies, which have a vested interest in not having users that complicate their cases with destructive variables.Ammonium hydroxide is naturally found in beef too, I believe. It's also used to make cheese and various other things.
Yet people aren't worried until "pink slime" is bandied around.
There's no wonder such things aren't explained when it's a target for pop-alarmism.
As it was, a meat that was low in fat and high protein, cheap AND lest wasteful was removed because of said alarmism. I do not believe there was any health issues with it.
Again, the problem was not the particular use. Yes, it occurs in small amounts in all proteins. Yes, it is incorporated into other foods. The issues were two fold: people don't like when they feel they get poor quality from their own nation's business while others get better quality and it's never a good tack to take that you didn't lie about your process, you just didn't disclose it.
No, most foods deemed not safe for human consumption aren't all that likely to be harmful for humans. By the same token, most humans aren't going to react well when you tell them you took meat of lesser quality than what is found in mid-gdare dogs kibble, washed it, used it - and didn't give them the option to opt out of consuming lesser quality meats than they fed their dogs. The stir had nothing to do with an argument that the pink slime would kill anyone and everything to do with the argument that failing to disclose isn't lying and that once you lie by omission, people tend to wonder what else you've forgotten to mention.
Pink slime wasn't removed from McD's food because of alarmism. ITt was removed because they aregued it was the only feasible alternative in a high beef price market and everyone was doing it - and then it was revealed that they were the only major fast food chain still using it.0 -
There are ways to cut down what you spend on groceries. I'm not trying to sacrifice health for money, there does come a point when you are sacrificing one for the other. I've already given up eating organic due to cost. I'm personally not going to start eating more unhealthy foods just to save a dollar. But the truly poor will. It's really a shame that little debbies are so much less expensive then real food. It promotes unhealthy choices.
You are still completely missing the point.
Firstly you have not argued the point that junk is cheaper than healthy. We have talked about chicken breasts (the most expensive chicken part) being the example. It isnt. You go about eating organic. Yep, everybody knows that organic isnt cheap just in the same way that McDonalds every day wouldnt be cheap.
Rice, however, for example, is cheap.... and healthier than fries, cheap burgers and the other products high in saturated fat. This however, is an example of lifestyle choice which is generally ignored. Other cuts of chicken, different veg, etc. are also cheap.
When you talk of McDonalds means being the cheaper option, you are clearly ignoring this.
Furthermore, you do not take into account healthy/unhealthy portion sizes, simply stating junk is cheaper. The problem with most obese people is that they love a side order or two or 8. If they were so poor that they were forced to eat portion sizes similar to a typically regular chicken salad then they wouldnt experience the same health problems and obesity rates.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions