The Food Storage Blog

We’re big bread eaters in my family. A few years back, I freeze dried some tortilla’s (March 2019) to try to put something vaguely bread-like into our storage. They were normal, from Kroger, nothing weird about them. My primary question was whether something with so little water content to begin with would come out well in the freeze dryer. They are a difficult food to store because you need a big bag to store them in (I ended up using a 12″x17″x6″ bag, which held maybe 8 tortilla’s due to the way they bend, and most ended up broken.)

So I did maybe 2 trays and ended up with 2 Mylar bags of tortillas. I found them early last year, sometime at the end of Winter or start of spring, and I opened up a bag. They were 5 years old or so at the time. They were crispy, tasty, and certainly did well in the freeze dryer. So, when all is said and done, this was a successful experiment.

Now this is where it gets interesting. Those open (still in ziplock) tortillas have been sitting in a warehouse since last year when I opened them. I’ve been cleaning out the warehouse as we prepare to move, and I found them. My assumption was to throw them out, because certainly they must be bad after spending all summer, fall and winter just on a table.

However, after all this time, they were still perfect.

Ok, not a that great of a story, but it goes against what my gut thought. In general, tortilla’s go bad in weeks, so to have them last 6 years, 1 of those years with no oxygen absorption or moisture control, makes me consider looking at adding them to my storage, no matter how bulky they are. While they would break trying to use them for actual cooking, they taste good right out of the bag, and would be good with soup or stew.

A second thought I had about them was I wonder if I could just dehydrate them instead of freeze drying them. It might only take a few hours to do a load. I just moved my dehydrator into my food storage area, so I am going to give that a try also!

(Sorry about the lack of photos, I didn’t think about writing it up until I was putting it in the freeze dryer)

This weekend, I decided to dig into a food storage project and test out a recipe I’ve been working on for my updated one-year supply plan: a Spicy Turkey Sausage Chili with Rice. I’m trying to modernize the traditional LDS food storage recommendations, focusing on shelf-stable ingredients that the average American family would enjoy, with less reliance on a more particularly LDS bent (Their recommendations are good if you’re a homesteader, but out of place in the average American neighborhood). This chili seemed like a perfect candidate—packed with stuff from my food storage: canned chili beans, dried onions, rice, plus a hefty dose of spices that would keep things interesting during a long-term emergency. But man, while this dish was a winner in terms of flavor, it was HOT! Turns out when I wrote the recipe out I had used ‘tsp’ correctly, when I actually started adding the spices, I added 2 Tablespoons of cayenne instead of 2 Teaspoons. I did the same with the garlic. Doh!

Anyway, I started with one of those massive 110 oz can of Bush’s chili beans I keep on hand (This one with a best by date of 2021!)—perfect for a big batch—and paired it with turkey sausage and rice. Overall, I’m trying to find a rice and beans recipe that uses both staples and tastes good with a minimum amount of ingredients. Because I wanted to get a full freeze dry load (15lbs for me, 5 trays), I actually used 2 10-quart crock pots and did 2 full batches.

Each used 2.75 cups of uncooked rice (about 10 years old in my food storage!), which I cooked separately as the rest was simmering, and I went for more spices than I ever have (I had AI pick me out some spices that might help give it a Cajun flair): cayenne, paprika, oregano, black pepper, thyme, and garlic. These spices align with the top 10 most commonly used ones (as I learned during another AI search recently), making them a practical choice for a food storage meal. Dried onions kept things simple, though you could easily use fresh onion. And the whole dish (all 19lbs worth!) came together in a bit over an hour.

I always check older cans prior to opening. The chili ones are showing some wear on the tops, but overall they looked good, though I did discard one with a bad dent. After opening the can (reminder: I need a new can opener) I could immediately tell they were still good, with no off smells, just chili beans in sauce.

The aroma as it simmered was great—rich, smoky, and savory, with the Thyme maybe being the odd note out, as its something I never use (I’m very plain Jane when it comes to spices). When I added the rice to the chili, it looked hearty and comforting, something I could easily eat after a hard day in any kind of survival scenario. I could very easily make this in a dutch oven over a fire or a big pot over one of my propane mini-stoves.

The first bite was a flavor (nuclear) explosion: I couldn’t tell whether it was the Thyme that seemed a bit overpowering, even over the cayenne. The turkey sausage added a bit of protein (more on that later), the beans were fine even 4 years out of date, and the spices were…spicy! Except for the Turkey Sausage which I bought this morning, it was made entirely from shelf-stable ingredients I already have in my food storage.

But: it was hot. Like, really hot. I know it wouldn’t be for many of you, but you have to remember that my idea of spicy is adding garlic pepper to my macaroni and cheese. And the 2nd bowl I had for dinner was even HOTTER. I don’t know if it setting for a few hours made it spicier or what, but it was like Mount Vesuvius and I burned the roof of my mouth. This was after I ended up adding a half cup of water to each Crock Pot while it was cooking; that helped, but I think next time I’ll dial the cayenne back to 1 tablespoon. I also think I need a bit more liquid; I’m going to try maybe a cup of chicken broth to give it a nice touch of oil on top.

Overall, this Spicy Turkey Sausage Chili with Rice is a win for my updated food storage plan. 15 of the 19 pounds made it into the freeze dryer, with one leftover tray in the freezer, and one pound in my belly.

It’s easy to make, uses ingredients that store well for years, and delivers on taste (if you can handle the heat). I’ll definitely tweak the spice level for my family’s palate, but it fits into my goal of creating a more diverse, practical one-year supply—less reliance on wheat-heavy recipes and more on comforting, familiar dishes like this. If you like a good plate of rice and beans, give this a whirl. If you have better spice substitutions than what I have, please let me know. Again, I was hoping to lean more to the Cajun side and while it was delicious I don’t know if I really succeeded at that.

One thing to remember: I’m not a cook, and I don’t even play one on TV. I’m a prepper just trying to be a bit more prepared and learn a bit more about flavors, spices, and what things go well together.

Ingredients:

2.75 cups uncooked rice

1 can (110 oz) chili beans

1 cup dried onion

4 tbsp garlic (minced or powder) (Should be 4 tsp or to taste, I’m just recreating what I did)

2 tbsp cayenne pepper (Should be 2 tsp or to taste)

1 tsp paprika

1 tsp oregano

1/2 tsp black pepper

1 tsp thyme

13oz pack of turkey sausage (I used the Kroger brand)

Instructions

1. Add Chili Beans to Crock Pot, putting it on high heat.
2. If you like your Turkey Sausage crispier, brown on the stove, keeping the pieces 1/4″ thick or smaller (for freeze drying), as well as halving or quartering if desired. If the texture doesn’t matter, you can cut and add to the Crock Pot and have it cook with the beans.
3. Add 1 cup dried onion and 4 tbsp garlic to the pot with the sausage. Stir for 2-3 minutes until fragrant. (If using dried garlic, you can add it with the spices in the next step.) These chili bean cans are big, so mixing thoroughly is important.
4. Add Spices: Stir in 2 tbsp cayenne pepper, 1 tsp paprika, 1 tsp oregano, 1/2 tsp black pepper, and 1 tsp thyme. Mix thoroughly.
5. Leave Crock Pot on high for 1 hour, stirring every 15 minutes or so, then turn to low.
6. In a separate pan (I did it in a Aroma Rice Cooker) Prepare the Rice:
   • Cook 2.75 cups of uncooked rice according to package instructions (typically 1:2 ratio of rice to water, so 5.5 cups water). The instructions for the Aroma cooker were odd…it suggested 1.3 cups of water to rice. This had the entire batch of rice end up pretty dry as well, which didn’t help the consistency of the whole dish. While the cooker wouldn’t hold a full 1:2, I will up the water to 1.5 cups/cup of rice the next time I try this to see if I can get a bit stickier rice.
7. Combine:
   • Add the finished rice to the Crock Pot, stir thoroughly. Turn to warm and serve.
8. Finished each Crock Pot ended up with 9.5lbs of food!

Notes

• Servings: A 110 oz can of chili beans is big (about 12 cups), so this recipe serves 12-15 people a pretty hearty portion. I ate mine with Scoops. Part of this experiment for me is figuring out what I would actually do at the end of the world with these giant cans of Bush’s beans. Most likely I wouldn’t be the one cooking, but it never hurts to learn something.
• Shelf-Stable: This recipe uses mostly pantry staples (dried onions, spices, canned beans, rice), making it ideal for food storage. I could just as easily freeze dry the turkey sausage as well (I think I have some tucked away in one of my totes) to have the complete recipe. However, if you don’t have a freeze dryer this recipe can get away without the turkey sausage. Honestly, 13oz wasn’t enough sausage for a recipe this big; I will double it next time (and end up with over 10lbs per crock pot!)
• Adjusting Heat: The 2 tbsp cayenne makes this very spicy. I’ll reduce this to 1 tbsp next time, plus lower the garlic and see how that does.
• It should be a little thinner, so next time I’m going to add at least a cup of chicken broth as it cooks, maybe 2. That should also give it a nice savory shine.

Back in the old days, I used to love getting into a good ole’ Facebook (or forums before that) row. Nowadays, it makes me sick to my stomach. As a father, I try to give good advice to my daughters; a consequence has been I try to take any advice that I give them (ugg!). Kindness, forgiveness, sharing, compassion etc. I really struggled with that last night.=)

I basically had a Facebook person telling me that I was lying when I said you could store food long term in 5 mil bags, and that I was a horrendous person trying to kill people because I had too many 5 mil bags on hand I couldn’t get rid of. Of course, most of us know you can store food in 5 mil bags because we’ve done it; I even have food from 2007 still stored in 3.5 mil and 4.3 mil bags. These products have been around for decades, and if they DIDN’T work, we’d know it. The Internets would be full of stories of failed bags and ruined food. And yeah, occasionally one of those stories pop up, and the culprit is usually user error. I had my own share of failures back almost 20 years ago when I first started and I didn’t know what I didn’t know; but again, that was on me, and not on the products involved. The good news is we also see the stories about folks opening up their Y2K food in 4.3 mil bags and its all still awesome.

So today, I’m going to break down the argument that there is something intrinsically better about a 7 mil bag that makes it so superior that 5 mil bags should never be used. You can find lots of this info in our video here, I’m just going to go into a bit more detail in this post.

Let me start with some premises:

1: Yes, the best 7 mil bags will be better than the best 5 mil bags. I think this is where some of this argument stems from. A good manufacturer of bags cares about both their products and the materials they are made from, and so our 7 mil bags are ‘better’ than our 5 mil bags from a technical standpoint, because there’s more quality material there. As examples, we add Nylon for tensile strength, we use real Mylar because its inherently stronger than the materials people replace it with. These things make a difference, and the testing shows it.

However, here’s the rub. Just because the 7 mil bag is ‘better’ by a few percentage points doesn’t mean its going to keep your food fresh any longer, because the amount of oxygen and moisture getting to your food is so small due to the incredible barrier properties of the primary barrier layer, which isn’t actually Mylar…its aluminum foil.

The harder truth for some folks to realize is that there are some 5 mil bags that are measurably better on some performance indicators than some 7 mil bags, depending on who is making the bag. It’s like how you can have a $25,000 automobile with better acceleration than a $40,000 automobile.

2: Aluminum foil – The best Mylar bags (4.3 mil and up usually) on the market use a .00035″ layer of aluminum foil (some also use a thinner .000285″ layer). It’s a common laminate, and used in all kinds of things, from reflective insulation to metallic tape. And in perfect condition, it has zero oxygen and zero moisture pass-through. This is the main reason why 5 mil bags have nearly identical barrier properties to 7 mil bags…they are both starting from a base of zero. Now, there is a measurement regarding the aluminum foil layer, ‘pinholes per meter squared’, and this is why when in actual use Mylar bags don’t have perfect scores when it comes to oxygen and moisture penetration. Both in the manufacturing process, as well as in the process of storing food, it has and can develop tiny pinholes. In many places on the Internet, you can see people freaking out about pinholes…but they are just part of the process, and they are inevitable. And this is why your Mylar bags have several other layers that are NOT prone to pinholes.

3: Other Layers – In our case, our 5 mil bags are made of 5 total layers, and our 7 mil bags have 7 total layers. We are the only Mylar bag seller we know still using Mylar as one of those layers. So why Mylar? It has good barrier qualities, exceptional tensile and mechanical strength and is very easy to work with. Others replace Mylar with lower-performing materials because it is expensive. LLDPE, the most common replacement for Mylar used by some of our competitors, is up to 500 times worse (yes, the numbers can be crazy) on OTR (Oxygen transmission) and up to 10 times worse on WVTR (Water vapor transmission) than actual BoPet. Our 7 mil bags (and now our Steelpak 4 mil bags) have a Nylon layer. Why? Because it too offers added puncture protection.

Most sellers sell 3-4 layer bags because they are cheaper to produce and offer sufficient protection for many uses. The good part for them is that a thick bag feels like a thick bag, however its made, which is why when you ask ‘what’s your favorite Mylar bag’ you get so many answers, because they all FEEL good and sturdy, and most folks think that correlates to being made from quality materials. However, ask other producers what their bags are made of, and WHY, and you’ll likely be greeted by blank stares. Most other sellers are white labelers, meaning they create an e-commerce business around selling a product that’s profitable. And there’s nothing wrong with that. But they are not Flexible Packaging companies, of which Discount Mylar Bags is the only one specializing in food storage packaging solutions. Even though most folks know us as Discount Mylar Bags, our official name is ShieldPro Flexible Packaging, because we design packaging solutions for both the retail and corporate marketplace. Our customers range from the Department of Defense, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, multiple university research labs (One which said our bags tested better for pharmaceuticals than some products designed for it), multiple food and supplement companies, the USAF (to protect parts from corrosion) and hundreds of others.

4: The Science – I know, I am very skeptical of that term as well. However, in this case, it is just the measurement of how products perform. I’m not even going to use the fancy OTR/WVTR numbers (though you are welcome to email me about them)…I’m going to break it down even further. So how much oxygen does a Mylar bag let through each year?

For a quality 5 mil 1.25 quart bag, the answer is .22cc/year.

For a quality 7 mil 1.25 quart bag, the answer is .19cc/year.

Both of those numbers are ridiculously low. If you are using a 300cc oxygen absorber from us, with around an 1100cc actual rating, and you assume 300cc of that capacity is used when you first seal the bag, you will have enough oxygen absorption for another 3,636 years with a 5 mil bag, and another 4,210 years with a 7 mil bag. So yes, that 7 mil bag will do better for you if you are an Egyptian pharaoh, but not so much if you’re a rural mom or dad like me.=) Of course, your food will break down long before you open the bag, but at least there still won’t be any oxygen in it a couple of centuries from now.

The numbers for moisture are actually closer than they are for Oxygen, and are essentially a rounding error, with no measurable improvement in MVTR between 5 and 7 mil and between .19 and .22cc/year.

So assuming you are using good bags, and good oxygen absorbers, you will get exactly the same results (unless you live 4000 years) using 5 mil bags instead of 7 mil.

I know this post and others like it can make folks feel a little weird. After all, the ‘Internet’ tells me to only use 7 mil bags! And the Internet is never wrong, right?

5: Yes, it feels WEIRD to think a great thick bag isn’t protecting your food much better than a thinner one, but it is true. Take a look at the below chart; these are various types of films used in various products. Please note the HUGE variations in these numbers, a difference by a factor of over 100,000 between some of the products. What films you use in manufacturing matters. However, please note that EVERY one of these films has its place, depending on the application. Some have a better melting point, some are easier to laminate, some bind better to aluminum or another material, etc. But the statement made to me last night, that a 5mil bag CAN’T ever be used to store food long term and that I must be trying to kill people by selling them, is just a statement made from a lack of information.

One type of plastic at 2 mil might not be able to hold up a 12oz cup of coffee, while another 2 mil film of a different plastic might hold up a brick. That’s how big a variation there can be. A plastic bag you put in your fridge might have an oxygen pass-through rate of 1000cc/day. A better one that is lighter than the first might have an OTR rate of 100cc/day, just through the use of different materials.

So if you’ve had a bad experience with a particular bag, please don’t make the assumption that every other product like it will also be bad. There’s as much difference in Mylar bags as there is between a Chevy and a Toyota in terms of quality of materials. And so just because your Ford broke down that time doesn’t mean even every Ford will, let alone another brand.

6: The one actual benefit of a good 7 mil bag: tensile strength and the ability to resist punctures. Yes, if you have puncture prone food, by all means use a 7 mil bag. But if you are only worried about longevity, you can’t go wrong with a 5 mil bag produced by a manufacturer who cares about a quality product, and there are several on the market.

It’s been a while since I did a too-long post, so this one’s been cooking for a while.  Being more active in Facebook groups has made me start to re-examine every bit of advice I’ve both given and received as ‘conventional wisdom’ over the years.  I’ve put up over a hundred bags of food recently, and I’ve gone back over my thousand+ other bags and it’s made me change my thoughts on one bit of advice I’ve been reading recently. 

The question I’m posing today is an easy one: should your Mylar bags contract when using an oxygen absorber?   The reason I felt the need to write this is to clarify some information I see people giving out on this subject.  Additionally, there was a gentleman in one of my earlier threads that said essentially none of his bags contracted and he thought it was OK because of what people were saying, and that started to worry me.  We (as a community) may have let the contraction issue slide too easily, and here’s why.  One of the most common answers to the question is a variation of : ‘they don’t have to, as air is only 20% oxygen, and that’s all that’d being absorbed.’  While true, that’s not nearly a complete answer.

TL; DR:  My new concise answer to this question is now:  Assuming your bag is mostly full and barring powders, yes, your Mylar bags should contract if using an oxygen absorber.  If they don’t (or haven’t), I would test a bag or two.  Of the dozens of food types, both dry goods and freeze dried foods I have stored (a partial listing at the bottom), the only ones where I can’t see some contraction are powders:  mainly flour and eggs.  There are a couple of other food types that show less contraction, such as bread or oats. Food in 7 Mil bags show less contraction than in 5 Mil bags, due to higher tensile strength and less ‘printing’ (This is where you can run your nail down a Mylar bag and see a line). Finally, heavy small bags, such as 7 mil 5″x7″x3″ bags, will show very little contraction vs. larger or lighter bags, especially if not completely full.

My concern is that some of the food storage supply companies may be deflecting from the fact that their absorbers are under-weighted (see experiment in a few paragraphs) by saying that its OK for your food to not contract.  And some of the freeze dry and prepper user base has picked up on that and there’s very little concern over bags not contracting.

So I did an experiment with samples I recently purchased from one of the most popular food storage companies.  I’m not going to name names, because I’d rather have folks reproduce this on their own than take my word for it if they feel my methodology has some holes.

Experiment Part A:

1:  2 brands of Oxygen Absorber, Brand A and Brand B; the Brand A oxygen absorbers are rated 300cc, and the Brand B oxygen absorbers are rated 400cc.  Generally speaking, 300cc is considered the right amount to clear a 1 gallon bag filled with food. The 300cc Brand A absorbers weigh approximately .303 ounce per packet; the 400cc Brand B absorbers weigh approximately .094 ounce per unit.

2:  20 8”x12”x4” 9 Cup 5 Mil (2.25 quart) Mylar Bags; both absorbers should have 0 issues with clearing this size bag, and this experiment should have ended here.

3:  Half the Bags are filled with Macaroni (approx. 2.75 lbs), and half with Quick Oats (approx. 2 lbs, they are way less dense).  Each Brand of Oxygen Absorber was used in 5 bags of Macaroni, and 5 Bags of Quick Oats.

I thought the initial part of the experiment would be a 1 and done.  Either all of the bags would contract or all of the pasta bags would contract (but not the oats, because I’ve heard for 15 years they often won’t, and it’s not something I’ve added to my storage until just recently) and that would be the end of the experiment.  However, when I came in the next day to check, something I didn’t expect had occurred.  All 10 bags of the Brand A oxygen absorbers (the ones I generally use) had fully contracted, all 5 of the brand B pasta bags had contracted, but all 5 brand B oats bags had either not contracted or ran out of capacity before they fully contracted.  A few of the brand B oat bags had the beginning stages of contraction, but not completely.

What does this tell us?  My thought is that the Brand B absorbers, which you can tell from the pictures are very small compared to the ones I normally use, had enough capacity to clear the Pasta, but not enough capacity to clear the Oats.  So what does THAT tell us?  A 300cc rated absorber, at exactly its rating, should clear 1.5 liters of air of oxygen.  A 400cc rated absorber, at exactly its rating, should clear 2 liters of air of oxygen.  The 2.25 quart bags I was using = 2.13 liters of air.  Meaning, both absorbers should be able to almost clear the bags with NOTHING IN THEM.  The fact that the 400cc absorber struggled to clear full bags of oats is a strong indication that its given capacity rating is suspect. (and potentially dangerous if people are relying on them in  2 quart+ bags) 

I don’t know if any math geniuses out there want to help me with this, but even if the full bags of oats had 50% internal airspace, the absorbers would only have had to clear 1.07 liters of air, well below the 2.0 liters 400cc absorbers SHOULD clear.  The pasta bags specific density WAS high enough for them to clear, so we know the actual capacity of those 400cc absorbers is somewhere between the Food Density (my made up word to describe how much internal airspace a particular food has) of Oats x 2.13 liters and the Food Density of Pasta x 2.13 liters.  In any case, I think I can state with certainty that those 400cc absorbers don’t actually rate 400cc. Yes, that sentence is hard to read, but I think it says what I want it to.=)

BUT, this made me need to add an extra step to this process.  Because the Brand B absorbers did work on Pasta, I decided to re-test using 1 gallon bags, the size that both absorbers should be able to clear, assuming a Food Density of 60% or higher (meaning a 300cc is supposed to clear 1.5 liters in a 3.7 liter bag, or about 40%).

Part of me didn’t want to do this test, because I knew the likely result and I hate rebagging food.=)  But its ‘For Science!’  If the Brand B absorbers had trouble clearing a 2.25 quart bag, they weren’t going to clear a 4 quart bag.  And I know the Brand A 300cc absorbers have an actual rating north of 1000cc, or 4.0 liters, which is greater than the size of the bag empty, so I knew it wouldn’t be an issue clearing even a much bigger bag.

Experiment Part B:  I was running out of food to put up and the gallon bags are way bigger, so this is more ad hoc.

1:  Same absorbers as in Part A

2:  12 10”x14” 5 Mil 1 gallon (4 quart, 16 cups) Mylar bags.

3:  The bags are filled with either Flour (another food I’ve always heard won’t contract) or various kinds of pasta (Medium shells, Penne, Macaroni, all of which should have a bit of different Density).

Results:  The results were exactly as expected.  All of the Brand A absorber bags were fully contracted, and none of the Brand B absorbers contracted at all.  Note about flour:  flour doesn’t have any ‘kernels’ or anything to contract around and show a nice pattern, but you call tell they contracted based on the little ‘bubble’ of air that sits at the top of the bag.  The Mylar on both sides of the bubble pulled together; its hard to see from the photo, but if you do it yourself you’ll see what I mean.  So yeah, the wisdom that says flour won’t contract seems accurate enough from a visual standpoint; you actually have to feel the bag to know it worked.

So what’s the verdict? 

1. Almost every food I’ve ever done other than powders (flour and eggs) have visibly contracted.  Some were much milder than others (grilled cheese in small bags, for example)
2. Even though the Pasta bags for the Brand B absorber contracted, I’m not confident they have enough capacity left to last 30 years to continue removing the very minor bit of oxygen passing through yearly.
3. The 5 mil bags handled all the kinds of pasta just fine, even though I’d consider some of it ‘pokey’.  Another win for quality 5 mil bags.

I’m updating my documentation and FAQ’s to more clearly represent that in almost all cases, yes, your food should be contracting, with these addendums:

7 mil bags ‘print’ less than 5 mil bags, so your contraction won’t be as deep and noticeable as with 5 mil bags.

Bags that are not mostly full may not appear to have contracted, but if you hold the bag you’ll feel that the sides have pulled toward each other. It may takes some fiddling to see what I mean, but if you do flour in full bags you should be able to get the gist of it.

Flour will not look contracted when complete, you’ll need to examine the bags closely to know for sure, especially the ‘bubble’ at the top of the bag.

Oats have more internal airspace than macaroni.  This one surprised me considering macaroni is kind of hollow.=)

Smaller bags show contraction less, but it should still be noticeable. 

This is the list of foods I’ve done that have shown contraction, stored in 5x8x3 and larger bags:

Dry Goods: Rice, Beans, Oats, Pasta, Wheat

A small sampling of my Freeze dried foods:  Chili, chicken and rice, turkey pepperoni, shredded cheese, chicken nuggets, fish sticks, turkey kielbasa, turkey sausage, breakfast sausage, hash browns, tater rounds, sliced chicken, chunked chicken, apple fries, lasagna, strawberries, Skittles. And many more. My totes are all stacked and sealed, but looking into them I don’t see ANY that AREN’T contracted other than eggs.

Complete list of foods that don’t look contracted when properly sealed: Eggs (freeze dried), Flour (My assumption is other powders will show the same)

If you have food that’s not a powder you are confident is sealed correctly with a properly sized oxygen absorber and doesn’t show contraction, please let me know and I’ll do some testing.

Finally, and I stress this. These are my results. They have been consistent for these two brands of absorbers every time I’ve tested them (which is often), but that still doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do your own testing. If you would like to test the Brand A absorber, this link will let you purchase 1 pack (including shipping) for $6 (basically my cost and shipping, so I’m not making anything here) so you can test for yourself. And then please send me a note with your results!

Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, suggestions, or complaints! Thanks!

So as I mentioned last time, I’m trying to update the LDS Food Storage Calculators of old into something that fits my family (and hopefully many other families) better.

To show you where I’m starting from, and where most of the other Food Storage Calculators are basing their numbers, here is an example: LDS Food Storage Calculator

Now, if you are a good cook and are prepared to use those ingredients, more power to you! But right off the bat, in the grains section half of it is devoted to Wheat. First, at least in our family, we have multiple Celiacs and gluten sensitive folks. Those sensitivities are also growing in the general population. So having that high a percentage of wheat is a likely recipe for requiring 2 extra outhouses. Plus, if its a grid-down situation, grinding wheat is a labor-intensive process, and you’ll be burning a good bunch of the calories you’ll get by baking bread.

The legumes is another minor challenge. Again, most families aren’t regularly cooking split peas or soybeans, so I’m adding more of what we eat, and removing things we don’t. As an example, I’m bumping the Peanut Butter up by a factor of 10. It’s easily portable and stores for a couple of years (if you don’t get the organic). One jar of peanut butter (1lb) is basically the equivalent of 1 short day’s worth of calories; you could live on it. Again, Peanuts and Peanut butter are both good storage foods, though like wheat, there’s a lot more people who are allergic to peanuts today than their were 40 years ago, so plan accordingly.

At the end, I hope to have a more usable point to start a conversation on food storage with a bunch of y’all!

If you have a favorite shelf stable (at least 1 year) food you’d like to consider us putting in the new calculator, please let me know!

As always, if you need anything, hit us up at Discount Mylar Bags.

Links: https://www.happypreppers.com/Pioneers.html This is an interesting link to a pioneer crossing the US in the 1800’s, and what they would take with them for a 6 month journey.

https://grandpappy.org/hfoodaff.htm He was the one who came up with the original ‘year’s worth of food’ recipe back in 2008 or so, and updated in for inflation for about 5 years. I can’t find the original list, but I’ve seen in online. You can find his new more modest lists here now. This list is also an inspiration for our new updated FSC. He has an older looking site, but it has a lot of cool stuff available.