CBC Radio49%

Pantry-only meal challenges could lower your grocery bill  but it might mean eating weird soup 53%

By Philip Drost0%

2/8/2025, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Optimism Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 19.6% saturation with 214 hits. Analysis detected 1,838 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,092 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.9% and a BS Rank of 53% (10,317 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.90% of the article peer group.

Lindsey Harrington just completed what she calls "no gro' January." 
During the first month of the year, she doesn't go to the grocery store. 
Instead, she uses whatever's left in her fridge, freezer and pantry. 
"I probably could have even went another week or two," Harrington, a writer in Halifax, told the Cost of Living. 
The 39-year-old estimates she saved between $200 to $400 during the month by eating only what was already in her house, and avoiding any trips to the grocery store. 
Harrington has even encouraged a friend to join the challenge, and experts say it's a great way to not only save some cash, but prevent food that might be at the bottom of your deep freeze from going to waste. 
According to a 2024 report by Waste and Resources Action Program, a U.K. 
NGO, and the United Nations Environment Program, 1.05 billion tonnes of food went to waste in 2022, which includes inedible food. 
It found that each person wastes, on average, about 79 kilograms of food each year. 
Some of that is unavoidable, but doing a yearly purge like Harrington is a great way to make sure that what you buy doesn't end up in the trash  even if it means you have to eat some V8 and navy bean soup. 
No grocery, no problem 
Harrington started her no-grocery January a few years ago. 
She wanted to save a few dollars while also balancing out over consumption during the Christmas season. 
The first part of the month is easy, she says. 
She has chocolates left over from Christmas, and boxes of frozen appetizers. 
But as the month goes on and her supplies dwindle, she's forced to make some interesting choices. 
"I ended up making a soup out of, like, just cans of V8 [juice] and, like, navy beans," said Harrington, recalling a past no gro' January. 
"I was like, I guess this is my life. 
But, you know, it's still fun and probably pretty healthy as well as pretty economical towards the end." 
Harrington has found a few things in the bottom of her freezer that she ended up throwing out, but she tries to use what she can. 
She tries not to purposely stock up before January, but she does make an exception for condensed milk so she has something to mix into her coffee. 
During the challenge, she's found some items she totally forgot about, such as frozen yogurt and a year-old piece of birthday cake. 
"There are always a few unidentified frozen objects  UFOs  that come out of the deep freeze that I didn't attempt even when they were unfrozen because I still couldn't tell what they were," said Harrington. 
But her husband isn't as thrilled with the tradition. 
"He's definitely like a meat-and-potatoes guy. 
So, you know, if I want him to eat dal for three meals in a row, he's not exactly stoked," said Harrington. 
Just Asking wants to know: What questions do you have about making food more accessible and affordable in Canada? 
Fill out the details on this form and send us your questions ahead of our show on January 8. 
How much do Canadians waste? 
Paul van der Werf, an adjunct professor at Western University in London, Ont., has been elbows deep in that waste. 
Van der Werf and his research team sifted through the garbage of 200 households. 
While the households gave their permission, they were not told what day the trash would be collected. 
He found households, on average, threw out three kilograms of waste a week. 
That would be 150 kilograms a year, per household. 
Part of that was avoidable food waste, which could've been eaten, while the rest was food waste that should've been in a green bin program. 
A third of all food produced is never eaten. 
We test out three popular apps that are attempting to tackle this problem by connecting shoppers with grocery stores and restaurants that have surplus food. 
How much do they really help the planet? 
He said some households were better than others, but that food waste added up. 
He says people were throwing about $700 to $1,800 year into the bin, costing Canadians up to $25 billion annually. 
"I don't think people understand how much they throw out and what that might actually be worth," said Van der Werf. 
"So reminding them of that and then giving them some simple tips to help them manage their food, I think that's a way that we can cut into that $700 or $1,800 per year that are being wasted." 
Simple changes 
Saving money on groceries can make a big difference in a household budget. 
Amanda Norris, senior economist with Farm Credit Canada, says there's a big difference between food prices now and where they were five years ago. 
"Since 2020, we saw food inflation increase about 24 per cent. 
And when we break it down by food category, things like meat products and bakery and cereal, over those five years, experienced a larger increase," said Norris. 
But you don't have to do a total pantry purge like Harrington. 
Paul van der Werf says one way to reduce food waste is by going into the grocery store with a list and sticking to it. 
Van der Werf suggests making a list so that when you go to the grocery store, you're there with a purpose, and not just wandering around aimlessly, haplessly putting stuff in your cart. 
He also suggests making more frequent trips to the store, and developing cooking skills. 
"We don't all need to be Gordon Ramsay  but some basic cooking skills to understand how much we actually need to make versus how much we do make," said Van der Werf. 
And, he adds, make sure to eat your leftovers. 
Harrington says she will continue with her annual January tradition because it's not only about saving money or clearing out her fridge. 
It also reminds her of how fortunate she is. 
She also hopes to do a smaller version of the challenge midway through the year. 
"It kind of brings you back to the basics and thinking about, say, when our parents were kids and it was a treat to get an orange in the toe of their stocking," said Harrington. 
"Just being able to have that delayed gratification, and to be a bit more grateful for what we have and, you know, making use of what we have." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 1.1%CBC: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Philip Drost: 0.5%CBC: 0.7%Anchoring Bias1.2%This article: 4.9%Philip Drost: 1.5%CBC: 3.1%Availability Heuristic4.9%This article: 3.9%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.9%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 11.0%Philip Drost: 1.9%CBC: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias11.0%This article: 5.0%Philip Drost: 2.4%CBC: 4.2%Framing Effect5.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.3%CBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.8%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.8%This article: 2.4%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect2.4%This article: 12.6%Philip Drost: 3.4%CBC: 4.0%Optimism Bias12.6%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.7%CBC: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Philip Drost: 2.4%CBC: 5.7%Negativity Bias8.7%This article: 6.2%Philip Drost: 2.6%CBC: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias6.2%This article: 1.9%Philip Drost: 0.5%CBC: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error1.9%This article: 3.0%Philip Drost: 0.5%CBC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 1.0%CBC: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 8.5%Philip Drost: 2.1%CBC: 3.6%Halo Effect8.5%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.1%CBC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.4%CBC: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 3.0%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.2%Straw Man3.0%This article: 10.1%Philip Drost: 3.1%CBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority10.1%This article: 2.6%Philip Drost: 0.9%CBC: 1.3%False Dilemma2.6%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.3%Philip Drost: 4.1%CBC: 4.8%Hasty Generalization2.3%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.7%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.6%Bandwagon2.7%This article: 17.1%Philip Drost: 3.9%CBC: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion17.1%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.2%CBC: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 11.3%Philip Drost: 2.3%CBC: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.3%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.8%Philip Drost: 0.1%CBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.8%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.1%CBC: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 19.6%Philip Drost: 3.8%CBC: 3.3%Anecdotal19.6%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.9%Philip Drost: 1.2%CBC: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.9%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.2%Philip Drost: 0.1%CBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.2%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.5%Philip Drost: 0.4%CBC: 0.1%Special Pleading2.5%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.6%Philip Drost: 0.4%CBC: 1.1%Unattributed Quote5.6%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.7%CBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.7%Philip Drost: 1.0%CBC: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice3.7%This article: 3.8%Philip Drost: 2.3%CBC: 2.4%Indoctrination3.8%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Philip Drost: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Philip Drost: 0.6%CBC: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.0%

1092 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers60%attributed speech438writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWaste and Resources Action Program • 13 words • 0.0% coverageUnited Nations Environment Program • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWaste and Resources Action Program • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 17 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 10 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 26 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 9 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 6 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 14 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 20 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 21 words • 100.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAmanda Norris • 24 words • 0.0% coverageAmanda Norris • 11 words • 0.0% coverageAmanda Norris • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 25 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 33 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 14 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 33 words • 0.0% coveragePaul van der Werf • 9 words • 100.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 22 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 9 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 15 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 35 words • 0.0% coverageLindsey Harrington • 28 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Paul van der Werf

100%flagged-word coverage
220 attributed words34% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -10.0 ptsWriter: 10.0%Paul van der Werf: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+0.4 ptsWriter: 9.1%Paul van der Werf: 9.5%9.5%Biased Writer Voice-9.1 ptsWriter: 9.1%Paul van der Werf: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+3.2 ptsWriter: 0.9%Paul van der Werf: 4.1%4.1%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.