to spend £280 a week to feed a family of 5?

[TempleOfBlooms]

I spend about £280 a week on food. This includes my work lunches which tend to be salads from places like Leon plus coffees etc. The rest is food eaten at home.

Breakfast for all five of us tends to be things like Bircher muesli or chia based stuff with fruits and nuts. Fresh juice too.

Lunches in summer are usually a selection of dips and cheese and meats and salads.

Dinner is usually fish or chicken with a selection of salads and grilled veg.

So fresh food but not caviar or ridiculous indulgences.

It seems like everyone else on here can feed a family of four on tiny amounts. How? We certainly could eat more cheaply but that would mean fewer veg, fewer fruits, less fish etc.

Is it really so unusual to spend so much on food? I never see anyone else admit to it.

Infact what is going on in your life is completely irrelevant to this thread.

Fucking hell. This thread is the most bonkers one I've ever been on!

Graph - thanks for your post. I wasn't suggesting by the "government guidelines" that it came from the government. I think that was actually shorthand used by other posters first. I did say quite clearly (and follow up in a subsequent post, in fact) that it was the National Debtline charity. And I said that their figures were for "groceries" which included a lot of leeway and other things that aren't pure "food", which the £53 figure for a "family" in the link from ONS below did not include. Btw, I couldn't see what constituted a "family" in that £53 stat, so it may not be like for like anyway.

I see you, and whale, and others, have been offended by the statements about food on a budget. I don't think that was anyone's intention in the first place, but it seems to have got rather personal now. I shan't post again after this on this thread.

£13 A WEEK per person!! Could you or CC manage that? I very much doubt it and you've certainly been vocal on this thread that such a low amount would mean nutritional needs not being met!

I assure you, I can cook on a budget. I would HATE to have to survive on £13 per person per week, though. Absolutely HATE it. And that is what I thought I got from CC's posts. That she was proud she no longer had to. I'd feel the same - so shoot me. It is no judgement on others who have to manage on less. But through choice, if I was lucky enough to have it (and I am), I would not want to.

School dinners are £2.30 per child per lunch by me. That's £11 a week for one meal, that is costed to be as cheap as possible as well as being nutritious and following recommended guidelines for protein/carbs/veg etc. A packed lunch is cheaper, but that's not the point. The point is, if £2.30 is a reasonable price for a meal in the day for a school child, so £11 a week, then £13 per week for all 3 meals for one person would leave £2 to divide between breakfast and tea x 7 days, and another 2 meals at weekends. That's why free school meals are a thing we should fight to keep, because so many families scrimp on the food budget to cope with their lack of income because it's a bill you can control in a way you can't scrimp on the rent.

I hate food poverty. I am always happy to advise people on threads about how to make their food stretch, I give to food banks etc etc etc.

I assure you I have empathy. But I still think £20 per person per week is towards the bottom of food spending for all meals for one person per week, and if you CAN afford more, why would you not?

It is not a judgement on other people's lives if they cannot afford that, despite working hard, or because of other circumstances. But I guess it could seem like a judgement if you spend £15 per person per week and others are questioning your choices ... but that's up to you. You can only control your own reactions to things. If you're happy at that level of spending DESPITE HAVING THE CHOICE TO SPEND MORE then own your own choices. Don't spend days frothing at the mouth about how offended you are on behalf of others. Walk away and examine why it bothers you so much.

Round of applause

For Squirrel.

Spot on.

for Cantankerous.

Oh, that’s how you do bold... good to know

NoSquirrels
People can be offended by things even it it doesn't personally apply to them.
What people are offended by is the implication that they are not feeding their families a healthy, well balanced diet! What is it you don't understand about that?

This argument is now circular and somewhat embarrassing. Is it possible to move on?

THEWHALE

It costs money to buy food. What is it that you’re not understanding about this?

NOSQUIRREL

interesting point about the school dinners. They are of course made in bulk, which should really make them cheaper.

The kids seem to have quite good school dinners, but they don’t have very much of it. I encourage them to fill up on the salad bar when it is open but they still come out of school famished.

Part of that is, I think because they’re expected to eat their lunch in their playtime, so the sooner they finish, the sooner they can go out to play which I don’t think really gives good balance.

But the meals are pasta bakes or equally carb-heavy recipes, jacket potatoes etc.

Okay for lunch, but not ideal for dinner (especially when that’s been the lunch)

My eldest is certainly more nourished on a well balanced packed lunch than sxhool dinner

I’d love to have that budget available to me!

I do think it costs a lot if you want to eat healthy.

Fruit such as strawberries, raspberries, grapes can cost £10 and be gone in a day in my house even though my children would like them everyday!

Apples and bananas are cheap but get boring after years of eating them!

CantankerousCamel
Ahhh I have now given up. Some people can not realise when they are wrong. You were offensive end of story!

"Spending money on fresh fruit, veggies and decent cuts of meat DOES make our food healthier. This is basic science ffs"

Except I posted links refuting that, other posters have refuted that. An apple from f&m still provides the same nutritional composition as one from lidl!

This week as stated I spent £70 for 2 adults, £20 of that was cleaning products, toiletries and magazines.

So £50 for 2 adults

BUT I was also stocking up on my tinned stuff which I do once a month which was £5.00ish to take advantage of an offer. So divide that by 4 £1.25

So I'm 51.25 for 2 adults.

BUT we won't eat all of it this week. Probably £40 worth (extrapolate to 4 adults) that's £80 a week. I already listed my fruit veg etc I tend to get upthread.

Being on benefits old system I have 2 better off weeks, a not as well off week and a skint week so I adjust my shopping accordingly.

So I'm regularly doing exactly what CC is saying can't be done.

Again as I said upthread I try to shop seasonally too. Not only is it cheaper, I believe the food that's in season is what your body needs in that part of the world at that season. It also means we're largely NOT eating the same thing all the time.

I am genuinely sorry for the loss of your friend though.

For me healthy food = mostly vegetarian, not too much meat, small amount of full fat dairy, full range of nuts, pulses for micronutrients. Plenty of raw/fresh food mostly veg. Not too much white flour, little sugar.

Graphista

An apple from f&m still provides the same nutritional composition as one from lidl!

Those spending £200 plus a week generally but organic fruit meats and veg

The nutritional value is definitely superior

Yes 'decent' cuts of meat doesn't make any difference

whether its aged for 21 days or not doesnt add to the nutrition

cheap beef mince is often a mix of beef and pork which is fine.

fat is fine.

the nutritional value of an organic apple is not superior!!

BUT it is less likely to have pesticides etc which aren't great.

Here's how:

Don't eat anything your great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food. "When you pick up that box of portable yogurt tubes, or eat something with 15 ingredients you can't pronounce, ask yourself, "What are those things doing there?" Pollan says.
Don’t eat anything with more than five ingredients, or ingredients you can't pronounce.
Stay out of the middle of the supermarket; shop on the perimeter of the store. Real food tends to be on the outer edge of the store near the loading docks, where it can be replaced with fresh foods when it goes bad.
Don't eat anything that won't eventually rot. "There are exceptions honey but as a rule, things like Twinkies that never go bad aren't food," Pollan says.
It is not just what you eat but how you eat. "Always leave the table a little hungry," Pollan says. "Many cultures have rules that you stop eating before you are full. In Japan, they say eat until you are four-fifths full. Islamic culture has a similar rule, and in German culture they say, 'Tie off the sack before it's full.'"
Families traditionally ate together, around a table and not a TV, at regular meal times. It's a good tradition. Enjoy meals with the people you love. "Remember when eating between meals felt wrong?" Pollan asks.
Don't buy food where you buy your gasoline. In the U.S., 20% of food is eaten in the car.

organic apples aren't magic!

apples are mainly water and sugar. A few vitamins a bit of fibre and pectin

All apples are the same. Non organic might have pestiicides on the skin, so wash thoroughly. Some seasonal old varieties have a better flavour but that's relative.

Highhigh as I stated and then referenced in subsequent posts there's been NUMEROUS tests that have shown organic food is not likely to be more nutritious than non organic food. i posted links too.

It's a myth.

It's ethically better because it's better for the environment but it doesn't affect the nutritional content of the food. Even the advertising refs are strict on this.

Scabbersley

“Less likely”

If it has been labelled as organic then it won’t

And the presence of the pesticides means it is nutritionally inferior. Not innately, no. But the addition of pesticides makes it inferior overall.

It doesn’t affect the nutritional content, I agree

But it’s presence makes it inferior

£80 a week for a family of four is exactly what I have said is the minimum needed. I’m not sure why you’re not reading that graph

I'm spending less than £80 per week for 2 adults. For a family of 4 which presumably means two children - who generally eat less than adults - I'm spending less than you say is the MINIMUM needed for fresh healthy food and providing/eating - fresh healthy food.

Highhigh you said

"The nutritional value is definitely superior"

Then

"It doesn’t affect the nutritional content, I agree"

The 2 statements are directly contradictory and many respected experts and numerous tests disagree with the 1st.

i think the effect of pesticides is more on the environment to be fair

there is no nutritional difference to organic food

Yes I’m sure you are spending less than £80 a week for 2 adults.

£80 is minimum for family of four