Scientific American Supplement, No. 1082, September 26, 1896Various
Science
Scientific American Supplement, No. 1082, September 26, 1896
Various
Science -- Periodicals
How much food is required on the average by men whose labor is mainly
intellectual is a question to which physiology has not yet given a
definite answer, but it is safe to say that the general teaching of
the specialists who have given the most attention to the subject would
call for little more than the 104 grammes of protein and very much
less than the 3,400 calories of energy in the food estimated to be
actually consumed by these young men when the second examination was
made. They could have dispensed with half of all the meats, fish,
oysters, eggs, milk, butter, cheese, and sugar purchased for the first
dietary and still have had more nutritive material than they consumed
in the second. Not only was one-tenth or more of the nutrients thrown
away in each of the two cases, but what makes the case still worse
pecuniarily, the rejected material was very largely from the animal
foods in which it is the most expensive.
The estimates of the quantities of food in the two dietaries just
quoted were made from tradesmen's bills and the composition was
calculated from analyses of similar materials rather than of those
actually used. The figures are therefore less reliable than if the
foods and wastes had been actually weighed and analyzed. In some
dietaries lately examined in Middletown, Conn., all the food has been
carefully weighed and portions have been analyzed, and the same has
been done with the table and kitchen refuse. The results, therefore,
show exactly how much was purchased, consumed and thrown away. One
dietary so investigated was that of a boarding house. The boarders
were largely mechanics of superior intelligence and skill, and earning
good wages; the mistress was counted an excellent housekeeper and the
boarding house a very good one. About one-ninth of the total nutritive
ingredients of the food was left in the kitchen and table refuse. The
actual waste was worse than this proportion would imply, because it
consisted mostly of the protein and fats, which are more costly than
the carbohydrates. The waste contained nearly one-fifth of the total
protein and fat, and only one-twentieth of the total carbohydrates of
the food. Or to put it in another way, the food purchased contained
about 23 per cent. more protein, 24 per cent. more fats, and 6 per
cent. more carbohydrates than were eaten. And worst of all for the
pecuniary economy, or lack of economy, the wasted protein and fats
were mostly from the meats which supply them in the costliest form.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account