Peg Bracken – I Hate To Cook Book

Peg Bracken

Ruth Eleanor Bracken was born on February 25, 1918, in Filer, Idaho — a small agricultural town that she left as a child when the family moved to Clayton, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis. She was bright, dry, and not particularly interested in being decorative. She graduated from Antioch College in Ohio in 1940 with a degree in English, changed her name to Peg because it suited her better than Ruth, and went looking for work.

She found it in advertising. Portland, Oregon, where she eventually settled, had agencies that needed copywriters, and copywriting rewarded exactly the skills she had: economy of language, speed of wit, the ability to make a reader feel something in the space of a sentence. She wrote fashion copy for accounts including Jantzen swimwear and Pendleton shirts. She sat across the office from a man named Homer Groening, whose son Matt would later create The Simpsons, which tells you something about the particular quality of imagination that that Portland advertising world contained. She and Groening also produced a comic strip together called Phoebe, Get Your Man, which did not outlast the decade but proved she could sustain a narrative voice across multiple installments.

She also wrote freelance pieces for magazines — light verse, humor columns, the occasional essay. One piece for the Saturday Evening Post, titled “My Husband Ought to Fire Me,” laid out in comic detail the argument that women homemakers were essentially employed in a job for which they’d never been hired, trained, or compensated, and at which many of them performed — at best — adequately. It was funny. It was also, under the comedy, a precise description of what the domestic ideal of postwar America actually required of women and what it gave them in return.

The book came from lunch.

Bracken and a group of working women friends she called “the Hags” had fallen into the habit of meeting regularly and talking about, among other things, the specific boredom of cooking. Not the act of eating — that was fine. The obligation to produce meals three times a day, seven days a week, indefinitely, for households that expected them and rarely acknowledged them. The friends traded what Bracken called “shabby little secrets”: recipes built on canned soup and frozen vegetables and boxed mixes, shortcuts that got the family fed with the minimum expenditure of time and energy, leaving more of both for the things they actually wanted to do.

She wrote it up. Her then-husband read the manuscript and told her it stank. Six male editors at publishing houses concurred, insisting that women regarded cooking as something close to sacred and would not respond well to seeing it treated as a tedious obligation to be dispatched as efficiently as possible. The sixth rejection delivered the insight she needed: she brought the manuscript to a female editor at Harcourt Brace. The editor read it and understood immediately what the men had missed. This was not a book that insulted cooking. It was a book that told the truth about how a significant number of women experienced it — and offered them, for the first time, permission to feel that way without shame.

The I Hate to Cook Book was published in 1960 and sold approximately three million copies. It did this by being, page for page, more honest about the domestic experience of American women than almost anything else being published at the time. The recipes were real — genuinely usable, built around canned cream of mushroom soup and frozen peas and cooking wine added to the cook rather than the dish — but the voice was the point. Instructions told readers to let a dish simmer “while you light a cigarette and stare sullenly at the sink.” Another recipe opened with a suggestion that the cook take a small measure of whiskey before proceeding. The chapter introductions made the running argument that getting from cooking hour to cocktail hour was a legitimate life goal, and that anyone who disagreed was welcome to invite her over for dinner.

The New York Times, in its obituary, would eventually describe the book as having offered women “at least a taste of liberation — from the oven, the broiler and the stove” — three years before Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique and named the problem that Bracken had already been describing, funnier and more precisely, in a cookbook.

That comparison is worth sitting with. Friedan wrote sociology. Bracken wrote recipes. Friedan analyzed the structure that trapped women in the domestic role. Bracken handed women the tools to perform that role in twenty minutes and get out of the kitchen. They were working on the same problem from different directions, and Bracken’s version sold at least as many copies.

She became a spokesperson for Birds Eye frozen foods, which was either deeply ironic or entirely appropriate depending on how you read the endorsement. She appeared on television and radio. She followed the original with The I Hate to Housekeep Book, an etiquette guide, an appendix, a sequel. She continued writing into her seventies, her last book appearing in 1997. She died on October 20, 2007, in Portland, at the age of eighty-nine.

She is survived by her daughter Johanna, who wrote the foreword to the fiftieth anniversary edition of the book. In it, Johanna described the book’s origins as “a group of professional women who would have been much happier sipping martinis with their husbands than spending the cocktail hour in the kitchen slaving away over a hot stove.”

Her mother would have approved of the summary. It was precise, it was dry, and it contained exactly as many words as the situation required.

50 bacteria linked to a leaner body and the foods that support them

I read in a newsletter sent by Laura Frontiero, “Researchers looked at the gut bacteria of more than 34,000 people across the US and UK, and found 50 bacteria that are most closely associated with good health.”

I queried ChatGPT and, in conversation it provided this:

“There is an important catch: 22 of the 50 don’t have recognised species names. They are organisms identified from their genomes in stool samples but not yet cultured and formally characterised. The paper explicitly says that only 28 of the 50 have available isolate genomes, and even 24 of those 28 lack recognised species names.

The underlying ranking data identify the organisms by SGB (species-level genome bin) because many cannot yet be assigned a conventional species name. The paper confirms, for example, that SGB15317 is Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and SGB4198 is Eubacterium siraeum.

One thing I think is particularly important

I would not call all 50 “good bacteria” without qualification.

The researchers found associations, not proof that these bacteria cause good health. The paper itself explicitly says that causal inference is not possible from these data alone.

Also, this is a fascinating result for your food-sustainability work because the majority of the 50 are effectively unnamed organisms. That means we can’t yet simply say, for example, “eat food X to grow bacterium Y” for most of them.

The paper does, however, contain information on which foods and dietary patterns are associated with these bacteria. That’s the part I think would be especially useful to you.

So what foods appear to matter?

This is where the earlier ZOE research becomes particularly useful.

For example, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, which is number 7 in the new health ranking, was previously associated with:

fruit
whole grains
nuts
vegetable oils
dark chocolate

and negatively associated with sugary drinks and animal-derived foods. ZOE notes that this bacterium is a major fibre-to-butyrate producer.

More broadly, the ZOE research consistently points toward:

Fibre-rich plant foods:
vegetables
fruit
whole grains
beans
pulses
nuts
seeds

Polyphenol-rich foods:
berries
nuts
seeds
extra-virgin olive oil
dark chocolate
tea
coffee

Fermented foods:
yoghurt/kefir
sauerkraut
kimchi
other fermented vegetables

as food categories associated with a more favourable gut microbial profile.”

Asnicar et al., “Gut micro-organisms associated with health, nutrition and dietary interventions,” Nature 650, 450–458 (2026)

The full conversation: https://chatgpt.com/share/6aa9a53e-0a24-83ec-bd51-26b2c52c2ba2

A Different View

Muesli

I was preparing my breakfast meal (home made muesli, chia seeds, an apple, paw paw, mango, raspberries, blueberries, strawberries, blackberries, kiwi fruit and some yogurt) thinking about all the goodness therein and I realised the medical cartel and I have an almost diametrically opposed business model.

The medical profession is a sickness industry. They only get paid if and when you are sick. The sicker you are, the more they get paid. Because their ‘handlings’ – drugs – come with an average of 75 side-effects, commonly one of which is death, most older folk end up being on 5+ drugs. Each additional prescription intended to handle the symptoms of the earlier one.

These drug handlings necessitate repeat visits to keep getting repeat prescriptions, often for drugs like statins that have no need or benefit or perhaps worse, the flu shot which increases your risk of getting the flu. Or the Shingles vaccine which increases your risk of getting shingles 13 fold!

Quite simply, my business model is based on delivering the best nutrition I can to help your body maintain or restore optimal health.

After all, nobody ever got sick for lack of a drug. But most diseases have their roots in totally remedial conditions:

Lack of nutrients
Overload of toxins
Inadequate exercise
Stress

Many people are (falsely) led to believe that their genes are responsible for their (adverse health) condition.

Granted, there are genetic factors. For instance the MTHFR gene mutation that affects 40% of us which prevents the assimilation of key nutrients, so if you have issues that is worth getting tested.

But the genes you inherit are only part of the story. And not even the most important part. The relatively new science of epigenetics (from ‘epi’ Greek for above and ‘genetics’ the study of heredity and the variation of inherited characteristics) has revealed that what we eat and our lifestyle are both key in determining which genes are activated and which are not.

Bottom line, the more individual correct decisions you make and actions you take, the greater the aggregated positive effect on your attitude, health and longevity.

It’s less like an additive effect (1 + 1 = 2) and more like the multiplicative effect from combining anti-oxidants. From my book, “consuming cacao with berries may triple the absorption of the anti-oxidants (found in both foods) into the blood.”

Check out my book: https://howtolivethehealthiestlife.com/

or my greens powders: https://www.yourgreens.com.au

Quote of the Day

“The thing always happens that you really believe in – and the belief in a thing makes it happen.”
Frank Lloyd Wright – Architect (1867-1959)

Dr. Naomi Wolf: “Pfizer Deliberately Tried To Kill Us All.”

Dr. Naomi Wolf

“They killed the babies and they knew it. They poisoned the breast milk and they knew it… they lowered the sperm count and they knew it.”

“This is evil on a massive level… they knew they were doing this.”

These are the facts after the court-forced dump of Pfizer’s own internal files — hundreds of thousands of pages that a volunteer army of doctors, scientists, and analysts team spent years reviewing.

#Pfizer watched babies die in utero and wrote “maternal exposure.” They tracked poisoned breast milk. They recorded collapsing sperm counts.

They logged wrecked cycles, damaged placentas, and permanent heart damage by Myocarditis in the young — and they kept injecting.

They did not stumble into this. According to that record, they saw the slaughter in real time, hid deaths to keep the emergency authorization, fought to lock the papers away for 75 years, and still pushed the shots into pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children.

Wolf’s charge is blunt: this was not a safety failure. It was an assault on reproduction itself. Not a bug… but an actual feature of the toxic shots.

The people who approved it, advertised it, mandated it, and silenced anyone who screamed were not “following the science.”

They were covering a crime against the unborn, against fertility, against the next generation — and they did it while calling dissenters dangerous.

They knew. They kept going. And they almost got away with burying the evidence forever.

Dr Preston Brooks

Covid Jab Child Deaths Study

Covid Jab Child Deaths Study

The more correct statement is: “VAERS contains about 39,000 worldwide reports of deaths following COVID vaccination, and about 24% of those reports occurred on the vaccination day or within two days.”

Breakfast Choices To Reduce Muscle Loss After 60

Sarcopenia

Discover the 5 breakfast foods you may want to rethink after 60 and 5 better options that can help support muscle health, strength, and mobility.

(Tom: One thing the video does not emphasize enough is that over 60 year olds need to pass a 30 gram protein intake threshhold at breakfast to activate muscle growth. This must contain 2.6 or more grams of the amino acid Leucine. That would require 5-6 eggs!

Whey protein is high in Leucine so adding that to your breakfast routine is a good call.

As is my Protein Blend: https://www.healthelicious.com.au/NutriBlast-Protein-Blend.html)

Click to view the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFGNuLXmvoc