Live data from Hacker News

Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

supplementsos.com

61–70 of 180 posts

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#61
Whilst it is nice people try and point out cheap options they ignore the following:

1) cost of running a fridge and freezer 2) calorie intake and how people are all different 3) large supermarket nearby and only you hanging around the reduced counter

With that I'm sure a very short small inactive person could live well on this amount and intake but we are not all small inactive people.

A few years ago I was in hospital, I eat breakfast, dinner, evening meal and late night snacks and had seconds on every occasion. I was not overly active and bordering on totaly inactive. I slept lots as well. In short I eat almost twice the ` so called` reccomended calorie amount. I had nothing like worms or the sort and over a 2 week period I lost over a stone in weight. Now I'm large frame, over 6feet tall and male and a active brain yet was phsicaly inactive, eating twice the so called daily calorie intake and had no medical issues like worms or digestive issue at all and I lost weight. In short my my personal calorie intake is over twice what the so called average is and when I read articles like this it is hard not to feel persecuted as other read them, take them as fact and then think you are wrong. Yet the facts show, as well as common sence that not everybody is the same.

The acticale on the BBC was born out of benifit cuts and was showing how somebody could eat cheaply, it totaly ignores that a even the `so called` average daily intake is 2000 for a women and 2500 for a man and that men and women are paid the same amounts, with that most of the replies and posted menu's came from small frame short people and females (no offence intended btw). With that I'm jelous I'm not a small female and able to eat less to lead the same quality of life. Sadly that is not so and that is te case for many people. We are all different and there is no cookie-cutter way to say this will sort everybody as it won't, or shoe shops would have shoes the same size and that would be it for everybody.

What I find worrying is the mentality that some people have and wil impose based upon this and what might be good for them is not good for others and they will not know any better as the `reccomended intake` gets bastardised from being average to the normal for all.

That said, not everybody has a garden to grow their own vegtables and that helps hugely, sadly I can't but we all have windows and a small window ledge herb garden can help loads.

I would also say baking your own bread helps as well on many levels.

Beyond that your down to mapping out what time what supermarkets reduce items, keeping it to yourself and playing hit and miss that others not in the same situation as you as there are only so many reduced items.

I have found you can eat cheaply, or you can eat healthy, but as a non vegan/vegatarian it is extreemly depressing.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So these people have no free time whatsoever?

On weekdays? Long job, long commute, children, sleep - yes, it is easy to have pretty much no free time for most of the week.

Then plan the meals, do the shopping, prepare and cook the food on weekends and stick it in the fridge/freezer for the coming week. Would reduce food preparation time to around 15 mins on a weekday.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#64
post #56

Eating cheaply is really difficult to do for the folks with the least amount of money to spend on food, as working is counter to the things that make eating cheaper: cooking your own meals, shopping or growing cheaper foodstuffs, having appliances to store items for longer periods or cook dried items, being able to plan meals out in advance, etc. That is the reason why convenience foods are popular. A lot of advice s…

From a book called Rework [1]: "When you want something bad enough, you make the time - regardless of your other obligations. The truth is most people just don't want it bad enough. Then they protect their ego with the excuse of time." I think virtually everyone in the UK has the means to eat healthy if they really want to. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Rework-Jason-Fried/dp/0307463745

king_jester was talking about the poor. I doubt telling poor people to want it more badly is going to have a huge positive effect.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#65
post #56

Eating cheaply is really difficult to do for the folks with the least amount of money to spend on food, as working is counter to the things that make eating cheaper: cooking your own meals, shopping or growing cheaper foodstuffs, having appliances to store items for longer periods or cook dried items, being able to plan meals out in advance, etc. That is the reason why convenience foods are popular. A lot of advice s…

From a book called Rework [1]: "When you want something bad enough, you make the time - regardless of your other obligations. The truth is most people just don't want it bad enough. Then they protect their ego with the excuse of time." I think virtually everyone in the UK has the means to eat healthy if they really want to. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Rework-Jason-Fried/dp/0307463745

The idea that everyone has time to do 'X' if they only wanted it bad enough is complete BS.

For people that work two jobs, have a family to take care of, commute several hours, have a sick spouse and sleep there is no more time in the day. No matter how badly you want it.

Unless you or the author of Rework know of a magical formula to make the day longer than 24 hours or how to operate on little to no sleep.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#66
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say satiating meals is a better goal than interesting meals. If you're completely satiated by reasonable portions then your energy levels will be solid and you'll lose/maintain weight without needing to think about calories at all.

We all have different goals, but interesting meals are certainly near the top of my priority list, especially since I eat with my family and meal times are more than just a way to fill a hole.

For most people, I imagine a decent-sized subset of appealing meals can be very satiating at the same time.

p.s. wtvanhest: Not sure what you have against blue cheese. Hopefully not "dietary fat makes you fat because it's calorie dense" because that would again be anomalous 80s thinking that ignores satiety effects and runs with a 1-dimensional model for something as complex as nutrition and aggregate consumption behaviour.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#68
post #34

Now if only there was consensus what is healthy eating (it changes once a decade, cyclical fashion). Fat is currently returning with a vengeance, while sugar is the killer molecule. 10 years ago a spoonful of butter was considered slightly worse than cyanide. The amounts of protein per day is also debated as are total calories, and carb/fat ratios. And the number of meals per day and the optimal amounts of fasts.

You mention some things that are under debate. Those things are not part of "healthy" eating, they are important for "optimal" eating. Fat is not returning with a vengeance. Common sense advice has not changed particularly much over the past twenty years. There are some things - dietary cholesterol isn't seen as evil (but the foods it's in are). But other stuff - replacing fat for sugar (replacing a real salad dressi…

"Common sense advice has not changed particularly much over the past twenty years. ...There are some things - dietary cholesterol isn't seen as evil (but the foods it's in are)."

No, definitely false. Dietary cholesterol has definitely been considered a bad thing and for the last 30 years people were told to avoid it, by heart doctors, in the form of avoiding cholesterol in your diet, in that specific terminology. It wasn't just that cholesterol was in "bad" things, the things were bad because they had cholesterol.

"But other stuff - replacing fat for sugar (replacing a real salad dressing with a low fat (but high sugar) dressing) has always been seen as bad advice."

Also complete tripe. Low fat diets have been advocated for decades now without a word given to what the fat was replaced with, because the fat was considered So Obviously Bad it didn't matter, anything was better.

The dietary consensus is in fact undergoing significant change (still in the early phases of penetrating the consensus but I'm pretty sure its inevitable at this point), but this is exactly how I expect the authorities to wiggle out from under the fact they were giving fatally-inaccurate advice for decades... straight-up historical revisionism. We never said cholesterol was bad for you, we never were universally against salt (just for certain at-risk people), we always said many fats were good for you, we certainly NEVER EVER EVER advocated transfats as a healthy alternative to fats how dare you even suggest that we did such a thing, and we have always been at war with Eurasia.

I will not forget.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#69
post #61

Whilst it is nice people try and point out cheap options they ignore the following: 1) cost of running a fridge and freezer 2) calorie intake and how people are all different 3) large supermarket nearby and only you hanging around the reduced counter With that I'm sure a very short small inactive person could live well on this amount and intake but we are not all small inactive people. A few years ago I was in hospit…

You are absolutely, without a doubt, incorrect. Making up random guesses about your caloric intake is exactly why people think all sorts of crazy nonsense about metabolism like you do. You were eating less than your recommended intake, not double it. You just suck at estimating. Most people do. There is no way you were eating 5000 kcal in the hospital, they won't even let you.

Re: Actually eat healthily for £1 per day

#70
post #67

Actually it's interesting to look at what people in developing countries (who typically only have £1/day or about that) eat: http://imgur.com/a/mN8Zs

I think that British family might be on the run, having escaped (barely) from the late 80s/early 90s.

They even have a VHS machine!

(Also I like that the german family have put everything in very neat rows)

Post reply on HN