Skip to main content

Urban food myth #1: it costs more to eat healthy than to eat fast food

I get so tired of hearing this:

"It costs less to buy a burger from McDonald's that to eat healthy food from the supermarket."
"Low-income families just buy processed food, they don't cook their own food anymore."

That always sounded questionable.  Here is a study showing in great detail that fast food is much more expensive than healthy food bought at the supermarket.

Also, it turns out that the vast majority of meals eaten by low-income families are prepared at home:
Blisard N, Stewart H. How low-income households allocate their food budget relative to the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan. Economic research report, United States. Washington, DC: Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2006;20.

What is true is that buying healthy vs. unhealthy foods can cost $1.50/person/day more, at retail prices.  However, when health cost consequences are factored in, unhealthy foods cost twice as much.



Comments

  1. Thanks for rising such an important topic! People should understand that this myth isn't true. The dark side of junk foods is not an unknown fact. Even knowing that fact that it may even cause cancer, people keep eating it. I recommend you reading this post http://www.agsinger.com/fighting-cancer-by-controlling-angiogenesis-foods-to-avoid/ in order to find out which foods are worth to be excluded from your nutrition plan.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is it a “Miracle Drug”?...if it Costs a Fortune and Creates Lifelong Dependency...&...Saggy Faces!?

[It’s been a while since our last blog post.  A lot has happened since– including some “miracles” ! So we’re going to do two posts in a row…] Normally we should all be happy about miracle drugs... shouldn't we ? Yes, there is lots of upside from taking semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy), tirzepatide (Montjaro)--and upcoming new, even-more-miraculous drugs TBD:  losing huge amounts of weight quickly, a much lower risk of diabetes–and probably less heart disease and other chronic conditions as well.  But what if the “miracle” requires:   $200-300/week, with a lifetime cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars…  a drug that you can never quit…because if you stop taking it, you gain back all the weight it helped you lose–not to mention the chronic diseases which the drugs kept at bay… and it leaves your face (and the rest of your skin?) sagging …    (plus, it’s so new at such high dosages– who knows what happens after years of use…? ) No doubt, in spit...

It’s Come To This for Many of Our Teens: Radical Surgery and/or a Lifetime of Pharmaceuticals

The American Academy of Pediatrics just came out in favor of powerful prescription drugs (which must be taken lifelong to avoid weight regain & chronic disease) for adolescents--and potentially for pre-teens (ages 8-11)--with moderate to severe obesity. Bari atric surgery (permanently reengineering kids’ gastrointestinal systems) should also be considered for adolescents with severe obesity .  (The Academy also recommends "nutrition support, physical activity, and behavioral therapy"--but as with so many other areas of US chronic disease management, we can see where default treatments are headed: drugs & surgical procedures.) Such radical treatment recommendations created the usual (and temporary and ineffectual) tsunami of news & social media shock and indignation. The decades-long performative reaction to the increasingly bad news on dangerous levels of early obesity–and now 1 in 3 teens with prediabetes, across ethnicities & income levels–is itself sicken...

Haven-Not: Silver-Bullet Health "Solution" Misfires

Can you have a better A-Team than this?   Amazon, Chase & Berkshire Hathaway joint venturing  via a new nonprofit, Haven, to finally solve our health care problems!   While I was hopeful when this joint venture was announced several years ago, I was also deeply skeptical.  Rather than addressing the root causes of health costs, such as inactivity and unhealthy nutrition, Haven tried  to "develop new ways to improve access to primary care, simplify insurance coverage and make prescription drugs more affordable"--including by throwing a lot of "big data" tech innovations at these issues. While this approach was pitched as a breakthrough, it was more of a Disease Management 2.0--focusing on more cost-efficient "care," rather than less chronic conditions to begin with.  The latter is the ultimate solution, but requires far more than blue-chip brands plus high-tech to resolve--and a lot more time.   2-3 years of effort just scratches the ...