Primal vs. Industrial Foods Cost Comparison

Richard Nikoley's post on Budget Paleo reminded me that about a year ago I created a table comparing the cost per calorie of common paleo or primal foods to that of some conventional processed foods.  Many people make the mistake of evaluating the cost of a food based on the cost per unit (e.g. per pound) rather than the cost per calorie or nutritional density.   Since we eat to satisfy our energy requirements, I find it more useful to evaluate based on the cost per calorie and nutrients, since I need a certain number of calories and a set of nutrients every day. 

To create these tables I used the lowest cost per unit I could find for the foods in question by shopping at local supermarkets in my area. 

• Trader Joe's: olive oil
• Food City:  Butter, conventional; pork roast or chops (on sale); beef top sirloin (on sale); eggs, conventional; sweet potatoes; white rice; Cheerios; tortilla chips; soda (generic); non-fat milk
• Sprouts: Butter, organic; walnuts; beef chuck roast; carrots; eggs, omega-3; beef with fat; oranges (in season); broccoli (in season, on sale); whole milk

Here's what I came up with for paleo or primal foods, purchased at common markets:

You can see that the fats have the lowest cost per calorie, followed by meats I found on sale, nuts, and conventional eggs.  Lard provides 1000 calories for 73 cents and olive oil for 75 cents.  Pork purchased on sale at Food City for $1.00 per pound (I've seen similar prices at Safeway, Fry's, and other markets) provides 1000 calories for 80 cents.  Thus, I could consume 3000 calories of pork, olive oil, and lard for a total cost of about $2.40 per day, or $72 per month (30 days).  If you needed only 2000 calories, you could eat for about $1.60 per day, or $48 per month.   For complete nutritional adequacy I would use some liver and cook some bones or inexpensive greens for minerals.

For some non-paleo foods, I came up with the following:

White rice is very low cost at 3 cent per calorie and 30 cents per 1000 calories, making it less than half the cost of olive oil, butter, or pork.  However, white rice fails to supply adequate quality or quantity of many essential micronutrients.  Further, eating white rice may increase the risk for developing type 2 diabetes (NIDDM).  Yes, it has a very low cost but I would rather see people invest in no-glycemic calories like olive oil, lard, or butter, or inexpensive meats like pork.

Perhaps to some surprise, Cheerios(TM) has a price tag as high as conventional butter when compared on a calorie for calorie basis, and so-called "cheap" junk foods like tortilla chips and soda actually cost more per calorie than olive oil, butter, and pork on sale.  These two junk foods also cost more per calorie than whole milk.

Whole milk is not paleo, but it is a matter of fact that humans can live in good health on a diet consisting almost exclusively of an adequate supply of whole milk, as shown by the Maasai, Fulani, and other pastoral societies.  In contrast, you can't live in good health on a diet consisting solely of Cheerios (TM).

A gallon of conventional whole milk supplies about 2400 calories and a wealth of protein, quality fat, vitamins, and minerals for only about $2.50.  A gallon of milk daily would cost $75 per month for one person.  Soda costs 30% more than milk on a calorie basis, and has NO essential nutrients.  While not paleo, a GOMAD (gallon of milk a day) diet would be nutrient dense on a mere $2.50 per day. 

Notice also that whole milk costs less than trendy whole wheat bread and non-fat milk. 

Any thoughts?