What We Eat And Use.

Waipawa Mail, Volume XXV, Issue 4457, 22 January 1903, Page 1

What We Eat And Use.

Australasians as Carnivora.

There is a keen controversy proceeding in Melbourne on the dietary -habits of the people of Australasia, in consequence of the following article in the Aryus last week : “ A study of Mr Cogblan’s latest statistical work reveals some interesting facts with regard to the food of the people. The excessive use of flesh meat has already been mentioned. The figures for Australasia under tlTis item were so startling as to provoke comment from the unemotional statist himself. It must come as a surprise to nearly everybody to learn that the average consumption of meat works out at two sheep and a fifth of a bullock per year for each man, woman, and child in Australasia. No other country can produce figures even remotely approaching our average of 2651 bof meat per inhabitant. The nearest are those in the United States, but they amount to only 1501 b per head. We eat more than twice as much meat as Englishmen, more than three times as much as Frenchmen, and four times the quantity used by Germans, Austrians, Belgians, Danes, Sweeds, or Swiss. Coming nearer home, the average for the Commonwealth is over 121 b per head above the average for Australasia. Taken alone, the Commonwealth average is 276.31 b per annum for each inhabitant. The average for New Zealand is 212.51 b, thus bringing the Australasian average to 2641 b. “ Queensland leads the whole group in the matter of meat consumption. The average for that State is no less than 382.51 b per inhabitant. They are a beef-eating people, the average being 2801 b per head, while the con sumption of mutton is 901 b per head, and of pork «iand bacon 12.51 b. Western Australia is next on the list, with an average of 323.91 b per head. The people of the goldfields appear, however, to be indifferent as to whether they have steak or a chop for breakfast. For beef the average is 147.31 b, and for mutton 147.91 b. Mutton appears to have a slight lead, but the figures suggest an alternative bill of fare, variation being secured by substituting one kind of meat for another. Western Australia consumes more pork and bacon per head than any other State, the average being 28.71 b, the next highest being Tasmania with 15.71 b. A more marked preference for beef is shown in New South Wales, where each inhabitant is debited with 166.51 b of beef, 118.8 lb of mutton, and 11.91 b of pork and bacon per year. It is something of a shock to find that the consumption of flesh meat in Tasmania, the apple orchard of- the Commonwealth, amounts to 237.91 b per head. “ If excessive use of flesh meat be a vice, Victorians may assume a virtuous air; if, however, it be proof of the possession of wealth, as Mr Coghlan half implies, they must deplore their poverty. This State is lowest on the list, the average per head being 209.31 b, or 1731 b below Queensland. Victorians share the Australian preference for beef, the average per head being 122.11 b, as against 75.71 b of mutton and 11.51 b of pork and bacon. South Australians eat 4.91 b more bee , 0.71 b less mutton, and o.llb less pork. New Zealanders prefer mutton to beef, the average consumption per head being 1101 b and 901 b respectively.

“ Western Australia leads the group easily in breadstuff's, no doubt because it contains a larger proportion of adults to the population than do the other States. New Zealand comes next, and Tasmania is third. The influx of miners into the two States named has made the averages of the settled States look very small. Bread and butter enter largely into the daily fare in both Western Australia and Tasmania, but while each inhabitant of the former State uses 28.11 b butter per year the Tasmanian gets only 12.31 b. A difference of 30 per cent, in breadstuff's and nearly 60 per cent, in butter suggests a considerable quantity of dry bread in Tasmania, or of waste butter in Western Australia. Victorians and Tasmanians use very little rice, but in Western Australia and Queensland the average consumption works out 19.91 b and 17.71 b respectively. “Porridge and potatoes are consumed in great quantities in Tasmania. Each inhabitant of the island State is credited with using more than of oatmeal and 5281 b of potatoes each year. Western Australians use 101 b of oatmeal each, but ‘ parritch ’ does not appear to be popular outside of Tasmania. The Queenslend average is only 4.11 b, South Australia 5.41 b, Victoria 6.91 b, New South Wales 7.01 b, and New Zealand 9.31 b. The latter colony comes next to Tasmania in the consumption of potatoes, the average being 495.41 b. “ These figures apparently staggered the statist. He states that the tendency in all the States is to substitute potatoes and other vegetables for bread, but he does not appear to consider it likely that each Tasmanian consumes a quarter of a ton of potatoes each year. He thinks it probable that some of the potatoes were

fed to stock. Victorians get through 2501 b of potatoes each year, but the modest South Australian is satisfied with 1281 b.

“ The principal feature of Mr Coghlan’s food tables is the high consumption in Western Australia of most of the articles listed, for the special reason already referred to. Especially is this so with regard to prepared foods, or foods easily cooked. The average consumption of tinned fish in the Western State is 8.581 b, compared with a Commonwealth average of 41b, preserved milk 241 b, Commonwealth average 3.451 b; onions 29.51 b, compared with 15.981 b, and so on. “ Western Australia also uses far more soap than any other State, which indicates that to wash oneself is no longer regarded as undemocratic on the goldfields. “ With the exception of meat and breadstuff's, Victoria compares favorably with the other States, but she does not set the standard of living. As a matter of fact there is no Australian standard of living. The statist, of course, confines himself strictly to necessaries in the table under review. But even in these the variation is so great that there is no approach to uniformity. The Queenslander feasts on flesh meat, which many accept as proof of prosperity. But he eati largely of rice, which Victorians with their average of 6.91 b, evidently regard as “ Chinaman’s food.” The same thing i 8 observable in Western Australia, where the consumption of rice averages practically 201 b per inhabitant. The food tables, in fact, merely prove that the standard of living as of industry, is largely governed by local conditions. There are larger infusions of Asiatic peoples in the population of Western Australia than in other States, which will account for the greater consumption of rice.

“ The statist does not content himself with setting out dull tables of figures. He attempts to ascertain the thermodynamic effect on the people’s food. Basing his calculations on the accepted theory that the average man should be equal to at least 3300 foot tons of work daily, a woman 2200 foot tons, and a child 1100, he finds that in Australasia the average of all persons would be about 2125 foot tons.

That is the demand the work of the country should make on the energies of the people, but on the statistics quoted the daily food consumed by each individual is equivalent to 4199 foot tons of work. Without stopping to ask what becomes of all this surplus energy, Mr Coghlan carries his investigations forward with the object of ascertaining the amount of nutrients in our food. He reaches the conclusion that the quantity of food consumed in Australasia is far in excess of the requirements of the population. In other words, we eat too much.”