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.

You know a thread has jumped the shark when someone claims that eating a jacket potato is akin to eating a bowl of sugar. Utter, utter nonsense.

So many judgemental people. Spending a lot or a little doesn’t make you either better or worse than someone else.

That’s loads, I spend 60 and no more as I don’t have anymore to spend. There is myself & 4 sons. Eldest 2 are 17 & 13 and eat loads but I still manage to buy enough to feed them sufficient amounts.

I take my meals to work 12 hour shift so breakfast lunch and dinner. It’d cost a fortune to buy out at work. Kids go packed lunches also. I buy fresh fruit/veg and meat within this budget and sometimes it is a stretch. Can you afford nearly 300 a month for food, do you waste much? Wouldn’t hurt to adjust habits/change shops for a week to see how you’ve saved? Also just go for a coffee at lunch take the salad? My whole break is gone if I go out for food 30 mins I’d rather be sitting down relaxing

I didn't say it was, but if you are following a low carb lifestyle (which I don't, but have done in the past) , then potato is a carbohydrate that has the same effect on blood sugars as table sugar. Its completely incompatible with a low carb diet. Anyway, the OP has clearly lost interest in the thread, so we can talk about what we like

You’re spending loads on premium items,you can spend less if you wish
Make your own lunches,it’s no big deal and not onerous and will save you ££
Morrison veg Nov
Buy fruit & veg loose

I didn't say it was, but if you are following a low carb lifestyle (which I don't, but have done in the past) , then potato is a carbohydrate that has the same effect on blood sugars as table sugar.

I think it depends on the potato. Also, unlike table sugar they have a lot of other nutrients and there is no good evidence that they increase the risk of obesity or diabetes if your overall calorie intake isn't too high .

then why does it matter whether your diet is 'higher in carbohydtrates' or 'higher in protein'? I get that there may be 'tricks' in terms of satiety and excretion that make protein and carbohydrates different if you eat too much food,

Yes, if you eat on a deficit, you will lose weight. Weight loss is not exclusive to low carb diets. But as you posted yourself, low carb is more satiating, hence, easier for people who have difficulties controlling their appetites to do low-carb for weight loss.

Other people also follow low-carb because of metabolic diseases.

potato is a carbohydrate that has the same effect on blood sugars as table sugar. Its completely incompatible with a low carb diet

This!

Anyway, the OP has clearly lost interest in the thread, so we can talk about what we like.

Lol true.

Anyway, I know this thread is about OP's spending, but I just want to post this since she seems to be not here anyway.

www.diabetes.co.uk/news/2017/dec/ketogenic-diet-improves-metabolic-syndrome-in-multiple-ways-99064712.html

Now let's talk about Chris Hemsworth?
Wink:

Depends where you're buying your seeds and fruit and dips and shit. Aldi do all that stuff inexpensively. We're a similar sized family who eat the same type of stuff and it comes in around the equivalent of £100 a week.

YANBU if you're happy to spend £280 a week on food.
YABU if you're not.

Personally I'd rather save £100 a week for my kids if I had that kind of budget, but I couldn't give a shite whether or not you continue to eat that much money weekly, so y'know - horses for courses & all that

www.diabetes.co.uk/news/2017/dec/ketogenic-diet-improves-metabolic-syndrome-in-multiple-ways-99064712.html

As the very first sentence of that article says "A ketogenic diet has been shown to improve a range of health markers in adults with metabolic syndrome"

If you don't have metabolic syndrome, then you can still eat your spuds. Or you can be a faddy eater and spend a lot of money to no proven purpose. As you prefer.

Maybe assess for a couple of weeks e.g. Meal plan, see what you have left that's not eaten, take note of what your spending out etc, then look at your info gathered and see what you are really spending on to see if its to much or right for your family. I shop orcado weekly find spend less when I can go back and adjust list rather than picking up stuff don't need. Family of 3 plus dog spend £40-£60 per week

I'm thinking of starting an aibu "I spend £2000 a week on food. I love the Royals, so from now on I'm going to recreate their wedding menu's for our family dinners every week. Aibu?" and then watch the 40 pages fill up telling me I'm an idiot for shits and giggles. It's clearly highly entertaining

If you don't have metabolic syndrome, then you can still eat your spuds.

Yes absolutely. Nobody is saying otherwise.

The previous argument was just actually about potato and its role in a low-carb diet.

Or you can be a faddy eater and spend a lot of money to no proven purpose. As you prefer.

Actually, I eat like a diabetic to prevent diabetes as I have a strong family history of diabetes. If that's faddy, then I'd gladly be faddy.

But as you posted yourself, low carb is more satiating, hence, easier for people who have difficulties controlling their appetites to do low-carb for weight loss.

Yes, BUT people also state that a high protein, low carb diet is 'better' and 'healthier' FOR EVERYONE than one which contains the recommended amount of protein and uses a range of foods, including carbohydrates, to provide the remaining calories needed to meet a person's energy needs.

My point is that, for the many of us who DON'T overeat, as long as the diet is varied and contains enough protein, essential fatty acids, vitamins and minerals, there is genuinely no advantage to eating high protein, and a diet based on complex carbohydrates, sufficient protein, a modicum of fat, a source of calcium and LOTS of fruit and vegetables is absolutely healthy.

cantkeepawayforever

The topic is about potato and its role in low carb diet. And then progressed to the benefits of low carb over high carb in weight loss, as evidenced by the studies quoted by Harvard.

I did not see any post that states "a high protein, low carb diet is 'better' and 'healthier' FOR EVERYONE" - at least, I did not post that.

Anyway, people, carry on with the topic.

Actually, I eat like a diabetic to prevent diabetes as I have a strong family history of diabetes. If that's faddy, then I'd gladly be faddy.

Indeed, no problem to add "at high risk of" to "have". And for weight loss whatever works (which seems to vary a lot).

The topic is about potato and its role in low carb diet.

The topic has been all over the place.

Thing is, different people mean very different things by "low carb". I've seen diets very similar to my own - which daily includes potato, bread, rice, pasta etc - described as "low carb" just because they combine sensible quantities of carbs with other non-carb food (so no chips with lasagne and if you're having both naan and rice then have half portions) and they don't involve necking cake or adding "table sugar" to things. And of course other people can say that's not what low carb really means. But it all just adds to the mass of confusion about what's healthy and what isn't.

People who think that eating potatoes and rice are low carb don't understand what a low carb diet is! I have a healthy eating plate. It's a real eye opener how small a portion of starchy carbs ( rice, potato, pasta) is. It's not low carb though. The 'low' bit of low carb is the vegetables, not a small portion of potatoes. I agree that a diet with a small portion of carbs is healthy and I think more sustainable ( for me anyway) The reason we went off on a more interesting tangent is because if someone has decided a low carb diet is for them, it means they can't eat potatoes, not that they are bad for you.

It's a real eye opener how small a portion of starchy carbs ( rice, potato, pasta) is.

Well, not to the - surely many - of us who have never served over-large portions?

People should find what works for them. I know I feel better when I eat fewer carbs but no one is preaching to everyone else on here.
eat lots of veg and good fats and you can't go too far wrong and food in their natural state. It's pretty simple - just normal healthy food in moderation rather than processed junk.

Well it can't be that many- if everyone was eating what people on MN say they are eating, we wouldn't have a massive obesity and diabetes epidemic. Also, when you see pictures of food in ads etc, the portions of carbs are definitely not 1/4 of a plate, which contributed to the normalisation of huge portions of carbs.

People who think that eating potatoes and rice are low carb don't understand what a low carb diet is!

Like I said - of course other people can say that's not what low carb really means. But that clearly is what it means to some people.

It’s a lot more than I spend on food, but if it works for you and you can afford it then YANBU.

Also, when you see pictures of food in ads etc, the portions of carbs are definitely not 1/4 of a plate, which contributed to the normalisation of huge portions of carbs.

I think the carbs should be about a third shouldn't they? Anyway, it is the normalisation of huge portions of food full stop which has caused the problem of obesity and health problems associated with it, not carbs in particular.