I have a theory that there is a impossible trinity (like in economics), where a food cannot be delicious, cheap and healthy at the same time. At maximum 2 of the 3 can be achieved.

Is there any food that breaks this theory?

Edit: I was thinking more about dishes (or something you put in your mouth) than the raw substances

Some popular suggestions include

  • fruits (in season) and vegetables
  • lentils, beans, rice
  • mushrooms
  • chicken
  • just eat in moderation

Edit 2: Thanks for the various answers. Now there are a lot of (mostly bean-based) recipes for everyone to try out!

Also someone made a community for cheap healthy food after seeing this topic!

    • pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.worldEnglish
      22·
      1 year ago

      Lean protein =/= healthy. Like, at all. This is a myth from the freaking 1980s. Nutritional profile is a breakdown of the micronutrients that a food has, and it determines whether a food is “nutritious” and therefore, in general terms, “healthy”.

      Please, oh please, don’t go around telling people that food is healthy if it is a lean protein. I’m sure it’s well intended, but it’s also misinformed. If you want to learn about how to assess whether a food is healthy, go make an appointment with a dietitian - your insurance will often cover the first appointment.

      • sacbuntchris@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        1 year ago

        You sure typed a lot without explaining what the nutritional profile of chicken is or why it’s not healthy.

        • pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          Sorry, unfortunately nutrition is more complex than what you can sum up in a few sentences. To answer that though:

          • Chicken isn’t categorically “unhealthy” in the same way double stuf oreos cooked in lard are - I said in another comment that it’s the ultimate neutral food, and if you look at its profile I think that’s a fair statement. It’s not completely devoid of nutrients, it has a couple of things in significant quantities - phosphorus, selenium, and B3 for example - but overall it’s not very nutrient dense. It doesn’t have a ton of huge negatives either - a bit of saturated fat, but nothing to write home about. If you’re looking at a “Hitler-Hanks” spectrum where the lard oreos are on one end and a spinach chia seed broccoli whatever salad on the other, then chicken is probably right in the middle somewhere. Its D&D alignment is True Neutral. The point I was making in my earlier comment was that “protein” doesn’t make a food healthy, and that there’s a lot more to it than that, and if people use that mental shortcut they might end up making misinformed decisions.

          • The nutritional profile of chicken would be a lot to type out, but you can look at the NCCDB or Cronometer Gold (which uses NCCDB among others) for an elaborate breakdown. Just keep in mind that it doesn’t capture everything - it’s an amazing tool, but it won’t cover the catechins in your tea, for example.

          Ultimately though, if you’re reading this, let me take this opportunity to encourage you to GO SEE A REGISTERED DIETITIAN. Your insurance will often cover 80+% of your first appointment, but even if they don’t it’s an amazing investment. You’ll live longer, probably spend less on food, and spend a lot less on hospital bills after your first heart attack.