Food Prices, Shortages & Inflation - The Trash Index

[Icu4dzs]

The government is going to continue to say that everything is fine and things are getting better.

And here is a good example...

"Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said a sustained rise in prices for oil and other commodities would threaten the economic recovery, but that even with the turmoil in the Middle East he did not expect higher prices would create inflation problems in the United States.

"The most likely outcome is that the recent rise in commodity prices will lead to, at most, a temporary and relatively modest increase in U.S. consumer price inflation," Bernanke said in testimony Tuesday before the Senate Banking Committee."
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bernanke-20110301,0,4049236.story

Possibly because ole Ben isn't worried about where his food will come from...unlike the rest of us.

You are not going to "feed" (i.e. provide all or most of the food requirements for) people on just 4x4' of garden area per person. Not even vaguely close. Not even if you live in Hawaii and can grow whatever you want 365 days per year; and of course most of us live elsewhere.

As for 4 x 16. well that is 4 times 4x4. As I said, PROPERLY managed it will certainly come much closer than NOTHING AT ALL doncha know? Admittedly, it would help to have a 365 day growing season, but then most of us don't have that, I agree.
It is also time for us to look at another (much less popular) subject and that is "how much we need to eat".

begins here

Most Americans eat between two to three times what they actually need to eat as exemplified by the epidemic obesity in the nation. Don't tell me they all have endogenous obesity and it is a "hormone problem" because we all know that isn't true.

Lets examine some facts. Calorie need is based on height. Ideal body weight is based on height. So the standard 70 kg adult who stands about 71 inches needs 30 kCal/kg daily. This is 2100 calories/day to maintain body weight. More than that will cause body weight to increase and less will cause weight loss assuming some normal activity...not digging ditche but say average house work.

Anyone whose body mass index exceeds 25 is overweight and if over 30 is obese. Plain and simple. You can rant and call me names but these are the facts/truth. Everyone has an excuse for being overweght but over eating is the most common source without question.

Having said that, if we look at what it really takes to feed a human being to maintain satisfactory health, 30 kCal/kg ideal body weight will do it. NOT 30 kCal/kg current weight. Argue all you want and call me names if you like but the truth is the truth.

If you actually look at the number of calories you eat, you will see that with few exceptions, Americans (by and large) consume way more calories than their pancreas can supply insulin to balance hence the PANDEMIC of diabetes.

Ever go into a REALLY, REALLY expensive restaurant? Ever see the people who can afford to eat there? How many of them were overweight? Probably not very many. So what we see is the obestiy, diabetes, hypertension and the other attendant health problems can be attributed to either over eating, alcohol consumption or tobacco use. Folks who do none of those things and who eat the right kinds of foods GENERALLY don't have those health problems. Yes, some few do but they are rare by comparison.

OK so why this particular rant? Well, when we look at what we really NEED to eat and not what we really LIKE to eat, you find the disparity is great and the cost is the result.

We can do better and feed our population to survive with good health but it will take care and consideration on the subject of what foods and how much we eat. That will help diminish the pandemics of cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, hypertension and a bunch more problems.

While I realize this is NOT a popular subject, it NEEDS to be out there because if we never know how much we need to eat to be healthy, we tend to over eat and that makes us very unwelcome in areas of the world who have not enough to eat.

YMMV
Trim sends

 

[Wifezilla]

Most Americans eat between two to three times what they actually need to eat as exemplified by the epidemic obesity in the nation.

Americans have to eat 2-3 times more food to get the same nutrients they got 50 years ago.

As for the caloric theory, it has been blown to bits. It sounded so nice on paper though.

http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/

 

[Icu4dzs]

Most Americans eat between two to three times what they actually need to eat as exemplified by the epidemic obesity in the nation.

Americans have to eat 2-3 times more food to get the same nutrients they got 50 years ago.

As for the caloric theory, it has been blown to bits. It sounded so nice on paper though.

http://nymag.com/news/sports/38001/

Fortunately, the studies that this article reviews examines the relationship of exercise to health. It does NOT address over eating or the metabolic balance of food and weight. Hmmm wonder why we think "the caloric theory has been blown to bits"? Are we defending something indefensible here perhaps or just not seeing "the forrest for the trees"?

Assuming a diet of "heritage" foods, the issue of needing more food to get the same amount of nutrient does NOT appear to hold much water...

but then Brutus IS an honorable man.

 

[Wifezilla]

I have been studying weightloss for many years. Lost a bunch of it myself, reversed prediabetes, high blood pressure, etc... That article talks about calories in vs calories out. It does focus on the exercise portion because the standard advice is eat less move more.

Since calories from different sources are used differently by the body, a calorie is not a calorie.

For the full spectrum of data on this topic, start here...
The Quality of Calories: What Makes Us Fat and Why Nobody Seems to Care
http://webcast.berkeley.edu/event_details.php?webcastid=21216

Here is more...
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blo...fat-loss-why-a-calorie-isnt-always-a-calorie/

Then there is this study which shows you can lose weight on low carb OR low calorie. The only problem is with a low calorie diet, you lose MUSCLE TISSUE. With a low carbohydrate diet, you lose fat and keep the muscle.
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/weight-loss/low-carb-and-calories-2/
http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/3/1/9

 

[Wifezilla]

As for nutrition levels...
"Between the traditional foods sampled or analysed 30-50 years ago and the modern food from 2004 to 2006, significant differences were found in the dietary composition. The percentage of local food had decreased, to a present average of about 20% and with it the dietary content of n-3 fatty acids. Also, the intakes of many vitamins and minerals had decreased, and were below Nordic Nutrient Recommendations in 2004 and 2006. Vitamin A, B(1), (B(2)), B(12), iron, iodine, phosphorus, and selenium contents were correlated with n-3 content, whereas vitamin C, folate, and calcium contents were not and the same time very low. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17629548

Fatty acid profiles in chicken...
"scientists performed nutritional analysis of standard grocery store battery chicken, an RSPCA approved corn-fed chicken and a proper pasture fed chicken. The results astonished me. Not only were the battery and corn-fed chickens significantly higher in fat than the pasture fed chooks, but they had 10 TIMES LESS Omega-3"
There was a video but now I can't find it. It was part of the show River Cottage.

 

[Dunkopf]

It will be interesting to see what actually happens. The price of food is what caused the toppling of Egypts President/Dictator and now Ghadafi. The price of food is controlled by Wall Street. Has nothing to do with who's sitting in the WH or who voted for who. It is caused by speculators who push the prices up and keep them up. The market is worldwide, hence everyone is affected.

There's not a whole lot the government can do about it. I guess letting people sell a few gallons of milk might solve all the worlds hunger issues. Probably not though. More likely a little regulation on these bottom feeding speculators would help.

I agree that everyone should be as SS as possible. You can't trust the election process in this country. The people with the most money get the job in 95% of the elections. That doesn't always bode well for the common man or woman.

I don't believe it will be as bad as the usual doom and gloom on here. I heard that GB is spreading the D&G real thick so that gives me some hope. When someone reliable says it's going to get bad real quick I'll start to worry a little more.

We will be planting a much bigger garden this year. Next time lean hamburger is on sale we will be stocking up as well as cheap chicken. Plenty of freezer space down in the basement.

I didn't quite understand the fancy restaurant thing and how rich people are skinny for some reason. The only reason they are skinny is because they have personal trainers and their country club wont let them in if they're too fat. It's doubtful any of them know where an egg comes from.

I can understand why poor people are overweight. They eat too many carbs and not enough protein. All their food is cheap processed food that is low in real nutrition. WZ is correct about caloric conversion. One of these days I might even read one of the books she is always suggesting.

 

[patandchickens]

You are not going to "feed" (i.e. provide all or most of the food requirements for) people on just 4x4' of garden area per person. Not even vaguely close.

As for 4 x 16. well that is 4 times 4x4. As I said, PROPERLY managed it will certainly come much closer than NOTHING AT ALL doncha know? Admittedly, it would help to have a 365 day growing season, but then most of us don't have that, I agree.

Yes, I know that is four peoples' 4x4, that is what I said.

"Come closer than nothing at all" is nowhere near "feed a family of four for a year", though.

Even with a 365 day growing season you will not make a *big* dent in a person's yearly food requirements with a 4x4 garden plot, certainly not "feed a family of four for a year off 4x16", not anything even vaguely close.

I am picking on this becuase there are a lot of newbies on this board who read careless statements like this and *believe* them

Pat

 

[freemotion]

I have to say I completely agree with Pat. I have at least 10x that in garden space and don't come close to feeding four people exclusively on what we raise. You can manage it all you'd like, and put all productive plants with no paths in that space (I do wide row gardening to save space, no single rows here) and you will barely make a dent. That is not even taking into account extremes in weather that wipe out certain crops. If I couldn't water this past year, I'd have NO food to speak of from my gardens. The two previous years, all root veggies rotted in the almost-daily rain, and most other plants had mold or blight.

I'm expanding my planting area this year. Mucho expansion going on here.

I just got back from the grocery store where I bought about 30 lbs of greens (mostly frozen already) and .....er.....12 canisters of Hershey's baking cocoa. I'm all set.

 

[ORChick]

I would venture to guess that when times get tough people will be doing more than just *moderate* exercise, thus upping their minimum calorie needs, which might make it harder to fill those needs with a 4'x4' garden per person. Its hard to get 2100 cal./day (or possibly more if you are grubbing in the garden, or digging holes for fence posts) just from garden produce.

 

[freemotion]

My plan is to also improve my foraging skills. They have been mostly theoretical. Watch out, pokeweed! Watch out, nettles!!!! Here I come!