goodness me, chicken is dearer than steak

[maytreefrannie]

We probably eat meat four or five days a week but in tiny quantities. I will use a small amount of meat of a pot of chili or ragu or something and lots of vegetables. I usually buy organic/free range, but cooking meat this way also means we're not consuming too much.

I feel eating organic or free range is so much better than battery-reared that less of it will give more nutrition than the 'chicken factory' stuff. Equally, I believe two or three free range eggs a week are better than eating a battery egg each day.

One supermarket near us were selling two chickens for 5 euro - they were tiny, obviously battery-reared with their thin almost not-there legs; I think it would probably be quicker and cheaper to throw the fiver out the window than to buy and cook them, there was so little of them. When I buy free range, even though it's more expensive, I find I get two if not three meals out of them (as Rhona says, I wouldn't necessary load up the second/third day meals with meat).

While I am prepared to pay a little more for quality free range, I agree with those who said that it might be the free range are priced higher than they need be.

[BrideXIII]

i get my chicken from my butcher, its free range, they buy in from a local farm so they know how they are kept.

a large one costs about £7-8 ( they are not organic can't afford that) but one bird will do 3 meals for three of us, a roast, one breast and 2 legs, a stir fry with the other breast, then the leftovers are used to make a stock with the meat shredded to make a risotto,you can't get 3 meals from a steak. Decent chicken is not plumped full of water so they don't shrink when cooked, the weight you buy is what you get.

[Flummery]

One way to look at it is - a chicken has cost one life. As steak has cost a fraction of a life. OK the cow is just as dead, but you get more meals per life in that case.