Author Topic: agri-economics and nutritional adequacy  (Read 2506 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline personman

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
agri-economics and nutritional adequacy
« on: August 11, 2011, 10:24:31 pm »


A simple example illustrates the intent of this question: Product A:free-range, grain-fed chicken eggs: $6.00/dozen Product B:factory eggs: $2.30/dozen

Weighing costs and benefits, would it not behoove one to simply up the intake of Product B and forgo product A altogether if one desires to increase nutrient intake? I mean this with regards to: beef, cheeses, eggs, butter, organs, and all other animal products and by-products. It seems the organic folk are very good salespeople.

Offline Projectile Vomit

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,027
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: agri-economics and nutritional adequacy
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2011, 11:16:39 pm »
This is a good question, I've been thinking about similar questions myself.

Right now my answer is no, because to acquire the same nutrition by eating twice as much food works our digestive system twice as hard. It also requires us to take in abundant nastiness with the factory-raised eggs that we wouldn't get with the pasture-raised, naturally-fed eggs.

So I currently think we pay more for two things: 1) a more nutrient dense product, and 2) a cleaner, less pollution-dense product.

But that's my take. I'm very interested to hear what others have to say.

Offline personman

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: agri-economics and nutritional adequacy
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2011, 04:21:35 am »
granted that would be ideal. But what about those who seek a given amount of calories/macros and have a finite supply of $$ at their disposal? Why not focus on those foods most nutritionally dense and yet poorer quality? Rather than diversifying etc.

Offline Projectile Vomit

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,027
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: agri-economics and nutritional adequacy
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2011, 05:24:51 am »
If you want to maximize calories, then you need to buy and eat fattier foods. Eggs are 80% water, which means 80% of the money you spend on them is essentially buying water. This is true whether you're buying high quality organic eggs at $6/doz (which is expensive, I can buy very high quality fertilized organic eggs here in VT for $4/doz, or at most $4.50/doz).

Here's a table I just made from a series of calculations. The goal is to estimate the cost (US$) per 100 calories of each food. I assume eggs are 90 calories each and used the costs you presented per dozen. I assume bison suet has 240 calories per ounce, which I got from the internet. I assume conventional ground beef yields 300 calories per 4 ounce serving, and that organic yields 240 calories for a similar serving. My most recent order of bison suet cost me $4.50 per pound delivered, and I used $3 per pound and $8 per pound for conventional and organic ground beef (I haven't bought either of these products in a very long time, so correct me if these prices are out of line).

The table:

Food                                Cost per 100 calories (US$)
Organic eggs                     $0.56
Conventional eggs              $0.21
Conventional ground beef    $0.33
Organic ground beef           $1.11
Bison suet                         $0.11

Obviously I can't live on just bison suet, I'd have to eat a little meat each day, maybe 6-8 ounces. But if you want high quality calories (and grass fed, grass finished bison suet is loaded with vitamins and minerals so it isn't just calories) then bison suet is the cheapest way to get a day's worth of calories by far. Assuming a 2000 calorie diet, that's $2.20 per day. I practice caloric restraint and usually only eat 1000-1500 calories per day, so my costs are lower. Much better than eating eggs, and you don't have to bother with the whole avidin antinutrient issue, the availability of fertile eggs, or whether your eggs are polluted from being raised in a factory on solely grain.


Offline personman

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: agri-economics and nutritional adequacy
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2011, 06:00:51 am »
These are all valid points but...I like to keep protein to 25-35% of daily calories hence the eggs, and cheese, et.al. Free trimmings from the butcher can't be beaten. I am wondering however if store bought eggs and cheese are worth whatever risks they entail(skewed 0-3:0-6 ratios, high-sodium, pasteurization, etc.)...
« Last Edit: August 12, 2011, 06:13:20 am by TylerDurden »

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk