Everyday Foods in War Time Part 3

Who does not sigh for the fairy table that comes at the pressing of a b.u.t.ton? It is invariably laden with the most tempting viands, satisfies beyond words, and disappears when the meal is over, leaving behind no problem of leftovers or planning for the next meal! No money, no work, no thought, only sheer enjoyment. Alas, how different is the world of fact!

Even if we have plenty of money we cannot escape from the thought of food today. There is imperative need for saving of food materials; at best there will not be enough to go around, and all the world, ourselves included, will suffer in proportion as we neglect the duty of food conservation. To be economical in the use of food materials according to the program of the Food Administration may, probably will, demand the spending of more money, time, and thought upon food. If we have the money and time to spend, well and good; but if we have not, how shall we do our share in sending more "wheat, meat, sugar and fats to our soldiers, sailors and allies"?

Thousands of people had to practice strict economy before the war began.

They have no more money than they had then and the cost of food has increased. Certainly the first duty of everyone is to secure sufficient nourishment to avoid the undermining of health and strength which is sure to follow inadequate food. But we must all remember that it is possible to make a great many changes in diet without altering food value, and that there are few diets which cannot be so rearranged as to give a better nutritive return on the money spent than is usually secured by our haphazard methods of planning meals. Saving of waste is commendable and will go a long way, but this is a kind of pa.s.sive service; loyal citizens ought to be active partic.i.p.ants in the food conservation movement, which is a movement to distribute food in the way which shall promote the efficiency of our allies and ourselves in this world upheaval. To do this without increasing the cost of one's diet requires a careful study of the situation. No one can give precise rules as to how it shall be done, but perhaps a few suggestions as to the underlying principles will help in determining a dietary plan which shall be economical and still in line with the general policy.

The same nutritive essentials must be supplied whether the cost of the diet be much or little. A moderately active man needs some 3,000 calories per day whether his activity be playing golf or working on a farm; whether his board bill be $3.00 a day or $3.00 a week. In both cases there must be suitable kinds and amounts of protein-bearing food, of other "building materials," and those substances which directly or indirectly affect the smooth running of the body machinery; nevertheless, these two diets, closely alike in nutritive value, may be very dissimilar in their superficial appearance. For instance, all the nutritive requirements may be met in a ration composed of three food materials, as milk, whole wheat bread, and apples; on the other hand, by one composed of canvas-back duck, truffles, lettuce, celery, cranberries, white bread and b.u.t.ter, cream, coffee, and perhaps a dozen other items. We love all the various sensations that come from the mingling in a meal of food hot and cold, moist and dry, crisp and soft, sweet and sour, exhibiting the artistic touch as well as the homelier virtues; it is the sacrifice of pleasure of the esthetic sort that food economy and to some extent food conservation entail.

The first step in food economy (aside from saving of waste) is to emphasize the use of cereal foods. As much as one-fourth the food money may be invested in grain products without nutritive disadvantage. But this is not the last word on the subject, since cereal foods, while cheap, differ among themselves in cost and somewhat in nutritive value. It is possible to confine one's choice to some which contribute little besides fuel to the diet, such as rice and white flour, or to include those which are rich in other essentials, such as oatmeal. It is difficult to express briefly this difference in foods in any concrete fas.h.i.+on, but recently a method of grading or "scoring" foods has been introduced which may help to make clearer the relations.h.i.+p between nutritive value and general economy.

We cannot live exclusively upon foods which furnish nothing but fuel, though fuel is the largest item in the diet and one which in an effort to economize is apt to fall short; hence a food which furnishes nothing but fuel will not have as high a "score" as a food which will at the same time supply certain amounts of other essentials, such as protein, calcium (lime), iron, and the like. By giving definite values to each of the dietary essentials taken into consideration and comparing the yield of these from different foods, we may have such a score as follows:[1]

Grain Score value products per pound

White flour 1,257 Graham flour 2,150 Rye flour 1,459 White bread 1,060 Graham bread 1,525 Cornmeal 1,360 Oatmeal 2,465 Cream of wheat 1,370 Hominy 1,147 Corn flakes 1,090

[1] For the method of calculation and further data see "The Adequacy and Economy of Some City Dietaries" by H.C. Sherman and L.H. Gillett, published by The New York a.s.sociation for Improving the Condition of the Poor, 105 East Twenty-second Street, New York City, from which these figures are taken.

By comparing the score with the price per pound we can easily see which contributes most to the diet as a whole for the money expended. Thus, if hominy and oatmeal cost the same, the oatmeal is more than twice as cheap because we not only get a little more fuel from it but we also get protein, calcium, iron, and phosphorus in considerably larger amounts; that is, we shall need less of other foods with oatmeal than we shall with hominy. This does not mean that hominy is not an excellent and a cheap food, but it does mean that when the strictest economy must be practiced it pays to buy oatmeal. The task of the housewife is to find out how much she can make acceptable to her family; how much she can serve as breakfast food, how much in m.u.f.fins and bread, how much in soups and puddings. This economy is strictly in harmony with the principles of food conservation--saving of wheat, so hard to do without entirely, so easy to dispense with in part.

Cornmeal gives as good a nutritive return per pound as cream of wheat, so that as long as the price of cornmeal is not higher than that of the wheat product it is both good economy and good patriotism to use it as far as one can. And, even if cornmeal should be dearer than wheat, one can save money by increasing the proportion of cereals in the diet so as to be able to be patriotic without increasing the food bill.

A second measure which generally makes for food economy is to emphasize the use of dried fruits and vegetables. The score of some of these foods almost speaks for itself:

Dried fruits Score value and vegetables per pound

Beans 3,350 Peas 2,960 Apples 955 Dates 1,240 Figs 1,782 Prunes 1,135 Raisins 1,550

Fresh fruits and vegetables

Beans 472 Peas 475 Apples 156 Bananas 236 Oranges 228 Peaches 138 Pears 228

From the foregoing it is evident that, unless the cost of a pound of fresh apples is less than one-fifth that of dried ones, the dried will be cheaper; that if dates and raisins cost the same per pound they are equally economical to buy. It may be noted, too, that the return on a pound of dried fruit may be quite as good in its way as the return on a pound of a grain product, but they will be equally cheap only when they cost the same per pound in the market. Here, again, there is no incompatibility between economy and conservation of special foods. Even in the case of beans is this true, for, while certain kinds are wanted for the army and navy, there are dozens of kinds of beans; one may count it as part of one's service to find out where these can be obtained, how they are best cooked and served. Soy beans commend themselves for their nutritive value, but how many American housewives have made them a part of their food program? How many have tried to buy them or asked their dealers to secure them?

A third step in the program of economy is the reduction of the amount of meat consumed. In many American families at least one-third the food money is spent for meat. That there are adequate subst.i.tutes which may be used to reduce the amount of meat bought has been already shown. Saving of meat is one of the most important planks in the food conservation program; so here again there is no inevitable conflict between conservation and economy. Some meat is desirable for flavor if it can possibly be afforded, but no economically inclined person should set aside more than one-fourth to one-fifth of the food money for it. How much one will get depends upon the kind and cut selected. There is not so much difference in the nutritive value as there is in the cost, as the following examples of "meat scores" will show:

Meat Score value and fish per pound

Beef, lean round 1,664 Beef, medium fat rump 1,221 Beef, porterhouse steak 1,609 Veal, lean leg 1,539 Lamb, medium fat leg 1,320 Fowl 1,453 Codfish, salt 1,710 Codfish, fresh[2] 519 Salmon, canned 1,074

[2] The low score of fresh cod is due chiefly to the absence of fat and the presence of water.

The great value of milk in the diet has already been discussed. The "score" of milk is about the same as that for sugar (milk, 761; sugar, 725); hence, if sugar is ten cents a pound and milk eighteen-cents a quart (about nine cents per pound), milk is cheaper than sugar. Yet there are people cutting down their milk supply when the cost is only thirteen or fourteen cents per quart on the ground that milk is too expensive! The economical housewife should have no compunctions in spending from one-fifth to one-fourth of her food money for this almost indispensable food. Whether the free use of milk will be good food conservation as well as good economy depends upon the supply. If there is not enough to go around, babies and the poor should have the first claim upon it and the rest of the world should try to get along with something less economical.

A pound of eggs (eight or nine eggs) gives about the same nutritive return as a pound of medium fat beef, but to be as cheap as beef at thirty cents a pound, eggs must not cost over forty-five cents a dozen. Eggs must be counted among the expensive foods, to be used very sparingly indeed in the economical diet. Nevertheless the use of eggs as a means of saving meat is a rational food conservation movement, to be encouraged where means permit.

The saving of sugar, while a necessary conservation measure, is contrary to general food economy, since sugar is a comparatively cheap fuel food and has the great additional value of popularity. Sugar subst.i.tutes are not all as cheap as sugar by any means, but mola.s.ses, on account of its large amount of mineral salts, especially of calcium, has a score value of 2,315 as against 725 for granulated sugar, and may be regarded with favor by those both economically and patriotically inclined.

In the case of fats, practical economy consists in paying for fuel value and not for flavor. The score values for b.u.t.ter, lard, olive oil, and cottonseed oil are about the same. The cheapest fat is the one whose face value per pound (or market cost) is the lowest. Fats are not as cheap as milk and cereals if they cost over ten cents per pound. The best way to economize is by saving the fat bought with meat, using other fats without much flavor, and cutting the total fat in the diet to a very small amount, not over two ounces per person per day. This is also good food conservation, since fats are almost invaluable in rationing an army, and those with decidedly agreeable flavor are needed to make a limited diet palatable.

No program either of economy or food conservation can cater to individual likes and dislikes in the same way that an unrestricted choice of food can. If one does not like cereals it is hard to consume them just to save money, especially to the extent of ten to fifteen ounces of grain products in a day. Yet one might as well recognize that in this direction the lowering of the cost of the diet inevitably lies. If one does not like corn, it is hard to subst.i.tute corn bread for wheat bread. But one might as well open one's mind to the fact that the only way to put off the day when there will be no white bread to eat is to begin eating cornmeal now.

Most of us want to eat our cake and keep it too--to enjoy our food and not pay for our pleasure; to do our duty towards our country and not feel any personal inconvenience. But the magic table of the fairy tale is not for a nation at war; food is not going to come at the pressing of a b.u.t.ton during this conflict. If we are to escape bankruptcy and win the war we must eat to be nourished and not to be entertained.

APPENDIX

SOME WAR TIME RECIPES

The following recipes ill.u.s.trate some of the practical applications of the principles discussed in the foregoing pages. They have been selected from various publications, a list of which is given below. The numbers following the t.i.tles of the recipes correspond with the numbers of the publications in this list.

1. Canned Salmon: Cheaper than Meats and Why, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Fisheries, Economic Circular No. 11

2. Cheese and its Economical Use in the Home, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Bulletin No. 487

3. Economical Diet and Cookery in Time of Emergency, Teachers College, Columbia University, Technical Education Bulletin No. 30 4. Food, Bulletin of the Life Extension Inst.i.tute, 25 West 45th Street, New York City

5. Honey and its Uses in the Home, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Bulletin No. 653

6. How to Select Food: Foods Rich in Protein, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Bulletin No. 824

7. Meat Subst.i.tutes, Connecticut Agricultural College, Emergency Food Series, No. 10

8. Ninety Tested, Palatable and Economic Recipes, Teachers College, Columbia University, Technical Educational Bulletin No. 34

9. Recipes of New York City Food Aid Committee, 280 Madison Avenue, New York City

10. Recipes in The Farmer's Wife, St. Paul, Minnesota, September, 1917

11. Some Sugar Saving Sweets for Every Day, Teachers College, Columbia University, Teachers College Record, November, 1917

12. War Economy in Food, Bulletin of the United States Food Administration

13. Waste of Meat in the Home, Cornell Reading Course for the Farm Home, Lesson 109

BREAD AND m.u.f.fINS

Corn Meal and Wheat Bread (9)

Corn meal, 1 cup Wheat flour, 2 cups Fat, 1 tablespoon Corn syrup, 1 tablespoon Salt, 1-1/2 teaspoons Cold water, 1-1/4 cups Lukewarm water, 1/4 cup Yeast, 1 cake