Why I need two Better Homes and Gardens New Cookbooks

What is wrong with this picture?

Your eagle eyes may notice that the photo above shows two different editions of the same Better Homes and Gardens New Cookbook.  One is from 1976 and one is from 2005.


Why do I have two?


Well, at first glance, it seems redundant.  They have pretty much the same categories of recipes (breads, vegetables, cakes and pies, main dishes, etc.).  Within the categories, the recipes listed are pretty similar, although the 2005 edition mentions aspic a lot less, and the 1976 one does not have a healthy eating section.  The 2005 has more pretty pictures and consequently fewer recipes, although I doubt anyone misses the recipes for Swedish pickled shrimp or chopstick tuna in the 1976 edition.


The basics are both there.  Fried chicken, denver omelet, macaroni and cheese, banana bread...


But wait a minute.  The recipes aren't the same at all!


When you hold them up side by side, the banana bread recipe from the 1976 edition has less calories, literally half the sugar, less flour, and less fat than the recipe from 2005.  Same size pan and everything.


The 1976 banana bread recipe doesn't make as tall of a loaf as the 2005 recipe, but I think that is probably a good thing.    Banana bread is a treat, I don't need a slab the size of my fist every time I walk by it.   I don't need the extra calories, fat, sugar, and carbs of the 2005 recipe.  I have cooked them both to see if the 2005 was worth the extra calories, and frankly I like the old banana bread recipe better.  It is subtler.




Back to the cookbook.




Between 1976 and 2005, the macaroni and cheese recipe difference is even worse than the banana bread one. The 2005 recipe has slightly less butter than the 1976 recipe (but double the overall cheese, cancelling out any fat advantage), and worse yet, the recipe now says it serves four people instead of six.  So fat, carbs, and serving size have all increased, a triple whammy.


What is the deal?


I thought that we were supposed to be getting healthier as a society!?  Wasn't the 1970's when everybody smoked like fiends and drank like fish, all the while stuffing pate and fondue and any number of gout-inducing dishes into their mouths?


The sad truth is, overall we eat less healthy now than we did at any time in the 1970s.


My guess is that recipes have been tweaked over 30 years as our society has changed.  As we have developed tastes for higher levels of fat, sugar, and seasonings, the recipes have been changed to reflect that.   


This is not to say that the 2005 version of the cookbook is bad.  I keep it because there are some recipes that don't appear in the 1976 edition, good recipes.  Some of the 1976 recipes are too rich for my tastes, with more eggs and butter, and I may use the 2005 version in that case.  But for the most part, if I have to go back to basics, I check the old book first.  It seems counterintuitive, but many of the recipes really are healthier.  And simpler.  And cheaper.  Less fat and sugar, less time-consuming, less expensive.


It makes you wonder what else has been tweaked over the years.  I wonder how the Oreos and Wonderbread of today would stack up against the Oreos and Wonderbread of 30 years ago?  I am betting that the ones from the 1970s would win...