I live in a former mining village and like most villages across the country, there are limited shopping opportunities. When I first moved here three years ago, it was the local woodland that was the main attraction and had I been looking for good food shopping locations, this would not have been it. I did try supporting the local shops and it does have a greengrocer, but the range is limited and the quality poor. Thus I have had to travel in to the city of Newcastle or the Town of Consett to get fruit and vegetables.
However, last year in the next village a greengrocer opened. And near Christmas I popped in and get some items. I was reasonably impressed with the quality, so I have been intending to return. But as its not cheap to hop on the bus for short trips, it was not worth doing that. Also with the hard winter, walking there was not really an option either, well not until now. With the arrival of spring, I decided that it was worth taking a stroll through the woods to greengrocers for the items that I needed. I was needing a few items to cook a particular dish.
While the quality of some items was not perfect, they were more than adequate for my needs, and the quality of most were better than most places and better than I could get in my village. The price was very reasonable too. For example the leeks were 30% cheaper than most places and half the cost of the supermarkets.
Also as they serve tea as they are next to the road entrance to the forest I was able to stop for a cup before walking back through the woodland landscape. Thus making a very civilised way to go shopping. I will be trying to make the effort to go as regularly as I can, but as with most people, I can only do that when time allows.
Tuesday 23 March 2010
Friday 19 March 2010
Who is cheapest?
It is rather interesting that since I discovered the other Supermarket in Consett and stopped going as frequently to Tesco to do my main shopping, they have started sending me incentives and discount vouchers. As well as the simple fact that I dislike the fact that Tesco is the largest retailer in Britain and I dislike supporting any business that is that dominant in the market, when I discovered Morissons I also discovered that I was saving money too.
While each of the supermarkets like to claim they are the cheapest, often the reality is far more complex as the quality of the items used to make the comparison can be very varied. Therefore, if you compare on a like for like basis, Tesco were and are far from the cheapest. Often the items that Tesco use to compare to prices with will be lower quality. This is one of the reasons why Tesco and Asda had competing television advertising campaigns each claiming they were the cheapest. Well it helped boost the coffers of the television media companies, even if it just confused the consumers.
While I have no love for the cheapest junk that the supermarkets try and foist upon us, for many people cheap food really matters for them. Not least because the poor, that are the majority in this country, struggle to afford to feed themselves.
While I may, and often do, rail about the really poor quality of some of the foods sold by the retailers, majority that are poor are dependent upon the “so called” food the processors and retailers supply. It is not that the poor do not appreciate good food, it is just that they have to buy what they can afford.
It is clear that there is an epidemic of obesity and other health problems as a result of this junk food, but often the debate has been strongly slanted toward blaming the poor for this. When the reality is that it is the salt, sugar and fat content of the cheap foods, often concealed, that is really to blame. After all no one would choose to eat bad or poor quality food.
Further while I am a great advocate for people learning to cook and home cooking, if someone lacks the basic skills and knowledge and are poor, they can not afford to experiment and risk having other family members refusing to eat the food. Therefore the media coverage has been rather bias, blaming the poor for problems that are imposed upon them.
While I will defend the underdog in the food debate, there is a minority among the poor that are culpable in their own poor diets. I have known several people, both male and female, who lived off of takeaway food for their main meal. While relying upon chocolate, crisps and biscuits (cookies) and other snack foods for other meals. They then would claim that they were overweight because of glands or hormone problems. All utter nonsense, as the science just does not back up such claims. Becoming overweight is just a simple equation of energy in and energy out in all but exceptional cases.
However, even people who are attempting to eat carefully and trying to avoid foods that are high in sugar and fat can have problems as the manufacturers far to often saturate supposedly healthy food with sugar, salt or fat. As they are cheap and can help to hide the cheaper low flavour ingredients. Therefore avoiding foods that are laced with the unholy trinity is near impossible sometimes. Even as a regular label reader, I can and do get caught out sometimes too.
The supermarkets are in a price war, or more accurately, in a war of price claims. Unfortunately the lower prices are only achieved trough reducing quality. Additionally the offers are often on the types of processed foods that should be either avoided or eaten rarely therefore, none of the major retailers are that cheap or good value for money.
While each of the supermarkets like to claim they are the cheapest, often the reality is far more complex as the quality of the items used to make the comparison can be very varied. Therefore, if you compare on a like for like basis, Tesco were and are far from the cheapest. Often the items that Tesco use to compare to prices with will be lower quality. This is one of the reasons why Tesco and Asda had competing television advertising campaigns each claiming they were the cheapest. Well it helped boost the coffers of the television media companies, even if it just confused the consumers.
While I have no love for the cheapest junk that the supermarkets try and foist upon us, for many people cheap food really matters for them. Not least because the poor, that are the majority in this country, struggle to afford to feed themselves.
While I may, and often do, rail about the really poor quality of some of the foods sold by the retailers, majority that are poor are dependent upon the “so called” food the processors and retailers supply. It is not that the poor do not appreciate good food, it is just that they have to buy what they can afford.
It is clear that there is an epidemic of obesity and other health problems as a result of this junk food, but often the debate has been strongly slanted toward blaming the poor for this. When the reality is that it is the salt, sugar and fat content of the cheap foods, often concealed, that is really to blame. After all no one would choose to eat bad or poor quality food.
Further while I am a great advocate for people learning to cook and home cooking, if someone lacks the basic skills and knowledge and are poor, they can not afford to experiment and risk having other family members refusing to eat the food. Therefore the media coverage has been rather bias, blaming the poor for problems that are imposed upon them.
While I will defend the underdog in the food debate, there is a minority among the poor that are culpable in their own poor diets. I have known several people, both male and female, who lived off of takeaway food for their main meal. While relying upon chocolate, crisps and biscuits (cookies) and other snack foods for other meals. They then would claim that they were overweight because of glands or hormone problems. All utter nonsense, as the science just does not back up such claims. Becoming overweight is just a simple equation of energy in and energy out in all but exceptional cases.
However, even people who are attempting to eat carefully and trying to avoid foods that are high in sugar and fat can have problems as the manufacturers far to often saturate supposedly healthy food with sugar, salt or fat. As they are cheap and can help to hide the cheaper low flavour ingredients. Therefore avoiding foods that are laced with the unholy trinity is near impossible sometimes. Even as a regular label reader, I can and do get caught out sometimes too.
The supermarkets are in a price war, or more accurately, in a war of price claims. Unfortunately the lower prices are only achieved trough reducing quality. Additionally the offers are often on the types of processed foods that should be either avoided or eaten rarely therefore, none of the major retailers are that cheap or good value for money.
Friday 12 March 2010
Eggs
It is said that you learn something new everyday. Well from the news story that a businessman has been jailed for selling cheap imported caged eggs as Organic and Free Range, I learn how to discover if the eggs are from caged production. Under ultra violet light you can see the marks of the bars of the cage imprinted upon the shell. As I have an ultra violet lamp for another task, I was able to confirm this by taking it to the supermarket.
As I have been caught out myself by retailers who will tell lies about the origin of of the eggs, it is useful to have this extra tool. Back when I first moved to the village I live in, the local greengrocer was doing this. However, as I know the codes that tell you what method of production the eggs are from, I soon spotted this. Initially I was prepared to accept that this was a genuine mistake. Then I went to the store again and specifically asked if they had any free range eggs. The eggs however were stamped with the code that said they were caged eggs. What the owner of the shop told me though was extraordinary, he claimed it was a special code for local production. That was and is rubbish as the codes are an Europe wide system.
The matter was reported to the appropriate authorities and they got a heavy slap on the wrist, as this was not the first time they had been caught doing this. I have no idea if they still try to get away with this as I no longer will use the store. I am not the only person who shuns the store, I know that a significant portion of the village avoid using the village greengrocer too.
There will be some folks that do not understand why this really matters, as to them one egg is just the same as another. Well I can taste a difference and free range eggs do taste better. But the issue of the source of eggs matters because of public health. It does happen that eggs can become contaminated and with caged production there is a greater risk for this. Also if there were a recall where caged eggs were suspect, but barn or free range were known to be safe, it could mean that consumers would still eat contaminated eggs thinking them safe.
This is why the businessman who has been convicted was using imported eggs, as the systems within Europe just made it impossible to fool the system and commit the fraud using eggs from inside the European Union.
As a result of this case though, the various bodies that regulate the egg industry have put in place extra measures and checks to close the loopholes that were exploited. Additionally, the supermarkets and major retailers have ensured that this will never happen again.
As I have been caught out myself by retailers who will tell lies about the origin of of the eggs, it is useful to have this extra tool. Back when I first moved to the village I live in, the local greengrocer was doing this. However, as I know the codes that tell you what method of production the eggs are from, I soon spotted this. Initially I was prepared to accept that this was a genuine mistake. Then I went to the store again and specifically asked if they had any free range eggs. The eggs however were stamped with the code that said they were caged eggs. What the owner of the shop told me though was extraordinary, he claimed it was a special code for local production. That was and is rubbish as the codes are an Europe wide system.
The matter was reported to the appropriate authorities and they got a heavy slap on the wrist, as this was not the first time they had been caught doing this. I have no idea if they still try to get away with this as I no longer will use the store. I am not the only person who shuns the store, I know that a significant portion of the village avoid using the village greengrocer too.
There will be some folks that do not understand why this really matters, as to them one egg is just the same as another. Well I can taste a difference and free range eggs do taste better. But the issue of the source of eggs matters because of public health. It does happen that eggs can become contaminated and with caged production there is a greater risk for this. Also if there were a recall where caged eggs were suspect, but barn or free range were known to be safe, it could mean that consumers would still eat contaminated eggs thinking them safe.
This is why the businessman who has been convicted was using imported eggs, as the systems within Europe just made it impossible to fool the system and commit the fraud using eggs from inside the European Union.
As a result of this case though, the various bodies that regulate the egg industry have put in place extra measures and checks to close the loopholes that were exploited. Additionally, the supermarkets and major retailers have ensured that this will never happen again.
Friday 5 March 2010
Sustainable Fish
In my other on line journal, I have long been ad advocate of the need for a moratorium on fishing to allow depleted stocks to recover. Long before the banking collapse, and then I was told that European economic rules did not allow member states to support or subsidies any industry or sector, thus fishermen could not be paid not to fish. These same rules were pushed aside when governments wanted to bail out the banks. But for far less money than it cost to bail out the banks, the fishing industry could have been paid to stay in port for two to four years, while fish stocks could have recovered.
The problem is that far to much of the fishing industry is unsustainable. A major part of that arises from the way the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is implemented in Europe, and for at least thirty years, that scientific advice has been ignored. The politicians always put jobs and short term votes, before the long term viability of the fishing industry.
Thus I am rather sceptical of claims of some sustainable schemes. However, the Marine Stewardship Council scheme does seem to really do what the job it is supposed to do.
However, the greatest problem is getting the message across to the public that sustainability of the fish they eat really does matter. So often when fish is cooked on television in cookery programmes there are frequently no mention of the sustainability of the fish, and often they are using fish that are unsustainable and endangered by overfishing. Equally, many of the supermarkets will make a big “Song and Dance” about using fish from sustainable sources and endorsed by the Marine Stewardship Council, yet will still sell fish and species from unsustainable sources.
Yet here in Britain one major retailer has gone a step further. While M&S (Marks and Spenser) is targeted towards the higher end of the food market and their customer demographic is much more Middle Class than most food retailers, they have signed up to the WWFs Seafood Charter. The first in the UK, and it will mean that by 2015 all their seafood will come from the most sustainable sources. Not just sustainable sources the most sustainable sources, thus ensuring that fish and fishing survives. Now I have no doubt that they have done this for economic reasons, and not least to ensure that they will have stocks for the future, perhaps when others can not obtain fish or seafood at all. But at least it is a move in the right direction and I hope that all the other retailers take note and realise that only by going to true sustainability will they have fish to sell in the future.
A link to see films that tell the story further
The problem is that far to much of the fishing industry is unsustainable. A major part of that arises from the way the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is implemented in Europe, and for at least thirty years, that scientific advice has been ignored. The politicians always put jobs and short term votes, before the long term viability of the fishing industry.
Thus I am rather sceptical of claims of some sustainable schemes. However, the Marine Stewardship Council scheme does seem to really do what the job it is supposed to do.
However, the greatest problem is getting the message across to the public that sustainability of the fish they eat really does matter. So often when fish is cooked on television in cookery programmes there are frequently no mention of the sustainability of the fish, and often they are using fish that are unsustainable and endangered by overfishing. Equally, many of the supermarkets will make a big “Song and Dance” about using fish from sustainable sources and endorsed by the Marine Stewardship Council, yet will still sell fish and species from unsustainable sources.
Yet here in Britain one major retailer has gone a step further. While M&S (Marks and Spenser) is targeted towards the higher end of the food market and their customer demographic is much more Middle Class than most food retailers, they have signed up to the WWFs Seafood Charter. The first in the UK, and it will mean that by 2015 all their seafood will come from the most sustainable sources. Not just sustainable sources the most sustainable sources, thus ensuring that fish and fishing survives. Now I have no doubt that they have done this for economic reasons, and not least to ensure that they will have stocks for the future, perhaps when others can not obtain fish or seafood at all. But at least it is a move in the right direction and I hope that all the other retailers take note and realise that only by going to true sustainability will they have fish to sell in the future.
A link to see films that tell the story further
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)