Like anything, your body goes through an adjustment period, but after a few days, it is quite easy. Cooking times and temperatures were seldom specified since accurate portable clocks were not available and since all cooking was done with fire. Retrieved from " https: Any problems that you may read about online are obviously one off items and not a consistent trend. I have lost 20 pounds in three months and haven't been exercising at all. Thanks for your lovely message just having a look through your blog now. I have lost 14 pounds with Nutrisystem and I am still losing weight.
Video of the Day
I think Nutrisystem builds good habits - portion control and good website for good support. I lost almost 40 lbs since April it's now December with absolutely no exercise.
I finally quit my gym membership after 4 months. They were quite supportive and worked with me the whole time. I'll return to Nutrisystem if the weight returns, but so far so good, and it's holiday overeating time! Next time I go veggie 4 out of 5 stars. I tried Nutri System almost two years ago and lost 22 pounds pretty quickly. If I need it again, I'll try the vegetarian meals as I hear they're just as tasty and easy to prepare as the Basic Plan.
I gave the Basic Plan 4 stars because one shipment of food I received was missing two snack bars. Be sure to count your food when you get it to ensure everything is there. Easy As Pie 5 out of 5 stars. I just started Nutrisystem about a week ago and I absolutely love it! I am a very picky eater, so I thought the food was going to be questionable, but it is surprisingly good. I really like that I don't need to count calories or spend a lot of time preparing meals.
I have been pretty good about completing the daily logs online exercise, meals, water, etc. They help me keep on track.
One of the things I think is absolutely great about Nutrisystem is the literature they provide with your 1st order. I received a restaurant guide used it twice already and a menu book that includes approved foods you can use to supplement your menu at the grocery store. I am doing the 5 day flex plan, but am contemplating upgrading to the full 7-day program as it really is a no brainer and I am concerned about having the liberty to choose my own meals on the weekends that has proven to be very dangerous!
The program is really simple to follow and my carb, sugar and salt cravings are gone. Today my wife came home with a cookie for my son she bought at Starbucks. It looked so good, so I decided to have the NS chocolate chip cookie for my dessert and it was very satisfying. I love this program! I have been on Nutrisystem for 6 months and I have lost just over 35 lbs. I also joined a local gym and have a personal trainer which of course helps. My goal is to look as good as the day I graduated from High School when I go to my 50th class reunion in By the way, I already think I look better than the day I graduated!
I know, wishful thinking, right? I've been on it for over a year and only lost 45 pounds. My support group keeps telling me to stick with it longer, claiming that if you stick with the plan you will lose all the weight you want. I've read on the NS support forums that 45 pounds is great, but I had hoped that I woul dhave lost pounds by now.
Maybe I'll need to start excercising afterall. When I started the program I did not know if I would stick with it. Diets can be hard to stick with sometimes. However, the Nutrisystem plan is not hard to stick with.
The plan is laid out so simply that anyone can follow it. The Nutrisystem plan comes with a money back guarantee. If a person joins the program and does not like it he can receive his money back. The plan is so easy to follow. I have lost 22 pounds on the program while eating things like chocolate cake. Unlike Medifast, the food is delicious.
If you are thinking of trying the plan but are afraid that you will not like the food please stop worrying. The Nutrisystem plan comes with a great menu with foods on the menu that are very delicious. I have lost 32 pounds and finally feel like I may make my goal of losing I wasn't thrilled with the food when I started, but now that I can choose the foods that I really like it is much better.
I love the pizzas loaded with red pepper or onions and pineapple. We've had out of town company and been to many family gatherings, where I used to overeat. I find that when I have my own food that I like and because I am rarely hunger now, that the temptation to cheat is just not there.
I also love most of the desserts, but who doesn't: Five years ago I lost 62 lbs on NS, but over the years I gained back 38 lbs. Now I am back on the system and intend to stay until I reach my goal weight. My co-worker is using Jenny Craig but it was just to cost prohibitive for me.
I've tried her meals and honestly didn't think they were as tasty as Nutrisystems are. Just 65 Pounds Left To Go 4 out of 5 stars. I am on my 10th day on Nutrisystem and I absolutely love it!
The food is great and a lot better tasting than Jenny Craig. I have lost 8 pounds so far and am really excited. I have 65 more to go to reach my goal weight. The website is full of good information and tons of motivation which I need and love!! Anyone can do this diet.
At 32 years old, I had surpassed pounds and went on a diet with Slimfast Shakes and low fat dinners that I made. I was single at the time and had the time to prepare my own meals and exercise vigorously for about an hour 5 days a week.
Needless to say, I did lose 40 lbs in 3 months, but it was hard work and I was always hungry. I'm now 40 years old now and after several failed starts I decided to give Nutrisystem a go. Being married with 2 children, my time is much more limited now. Nutrisystem is perfect for this reason as I don't have to count calories — it's all done online for me. The meals are reasonably good and you can pretty much choose the meals you want. The first month I went with the default menu and selected the meals I liked best for the second and third month.
I'm following the menu strictly and my caloric intake is around calories a day. All in all, I have been on the diet for 42 days and I have lost 23 lbs and 3 inches off my waist!
This program is well worth it! I needed to go on a diet. I had gained 25 pounds over the last year and I could not fit into any of my clothes. I did not want to go buy a whole new wardrobe when I already had a perfectly good one. With Nutrisystem I have access to a website that allows me to track my weight loss progress. I enjoy logging onto the website and seeing how far I have come. I also get support from the website. I enjoy almost all of the foods Nutrisystem has to offer.
They all taste pretty good. The best part of Nutrisystem is that I have lost weight with a program that is extremely easy to follow. I liked many aspects of the diet; however, I thought the food portions were too small. Maybe I'm too used to supersizing everything? The Nutrisystem plan does work though.
When I was using the plan I lost about fifteen pounds. The plan was also very easy to follow. I did not have to weigh out food. I did not have to count calories. I did not have to figure out which foods to eat to lose weight. I just had to follow the instructions that came with the plan and eat the food that the plan provided me with. When I joined the Nutrisystem plan I also received 24 hour access to the Nutrisystem web site where I could chat with someone for support daily if I needed to.
Haven't used it, but its nice to know its there for me. The food was just as tasty as pre-cooked frozen meals you buy in the grocery store. I enjoyed many of the foods that Nutrisystem offers. The desserts and snacks were delicious.
The dinners are done very nicely with foods that are very tasteful and full of flavor. The breakfasts were good I especially liked the pancakes. The lunches were also good. The thing I did not like about Nutrisystem was that the portions of foods they provided were too small. The program is extremely easy to use. Any man can join the program and expect to lose weight easily. I joined the plan and Nutrisystem sent me dieting tools, instructions on how to use the plan and great tasting foods.
I also have access to Nutrisystems website. The website includes chat rooms, blogs, and group discussions about dieting. The website is a great place for me to go to receive support.
I have not felt this energetic in awhile. I now have the energy to get through the day without feeling so tired. I even have enough energy to work out. Without the Nutrisystem plan I would still be overweight, unhealthy and unhappy.
Without Nutrisystem I would still be eating unhealthy and gaining weight instead of losing weight. Both the Eastern and the Western churches ordained that feast should alternate with fast. In most of Europe, Fridays were fast days, and fasting was observed on various other days and periods, including Lent and Advent.
Meat, and animal products such as milk, cheese, butter and eggs, were not allowed, only fish. The fast was intended to mortify the body and invigorate the soul, and also to remind the faster of Christ 's sacrifice for humanity.
The intention was not to portray certain foods as unclean, but rather to teach a spiritual lesson in self-restraint through abstention. During particularly severe fast days, the number of daily meals was also reduced to one. Even if most people respected these restrictions and usually made penance when they violated them, there were also numerous ways of circumventing them, a conflict of ideals and practice summarized by writer Bridget Ann Henisch:.
It is the nature of man to build the most complicated cage of rules and regulations in which to trap himself, and then, with equal ingenuity and zest, to bend his brain to the problem of wriggling triumphantly out again. Lent was a challenge; the game was to ferret out the loopholes. While animal products were to be avoided during times of penance, pragmatic compromises often prevailed. The definition of "fish" was often extended to marine and semi-aquatic animals such as whales , barnacle geese , puffins and even beavers.
The choice of ingredients may have been limited, but that did not mean that meals were smaller. Neither were there any restrictions against moderate drinking or eating sweets. Banquets held on fish days could be splendid, and were popular occasions for serving illusion food that imitated meat, cheese and eggs in various ingenious ways; fish could be moulded to look like venison and fake eggs could be made by stuffing empty egg shells with fish roe and almond milk and cooking them in coals.
While Byzantine church officials took a hard-line approach, and discouraged any culinary refinement for the clergy, their Western counterparts were far more lenient. During Lent, kings and schoolboys, commoners and nobility, all complained about being deprived of meat for the long, hard weeks of solemn contemplation of their sins.
At Lent, owners of livestock were even warned to keep an eye out for hungry dogs frustrated by a "hard siege by Lent and fish bones". The trend from the 13th century onward was toward a more legalistic interpretation of fasting. Nobles were careful not to eat meat on fast days, but still dined in style; fish replaced meat, often as imitation hams and bacon; almond milk replaced animal milk as an expensive non-dairy alternative; faux eggs made from almond milk were cooked in blown-out eggshells, flavoured and coloured with exclusive spices.
In some cases the lavishness of noble tables was outdone by Benedictine monasteries, which served as many as sixteen courses during certain feast days. Exceptions from fasting were frequently made for very broadly defined groups. Since the sick were exempt from fasting, there often evolved the notion that fasting restrictions only applied to the main dining area, and many Benedictine friars would simply eat their fast day meals in what was called the misericord at those times rather than the refectory.
Medieval society was highly stratified. In a time when famine was commonplace and social hierarchies were often brutally enforced, food was an important marker of social status in a way that has no equivalent today in most developed countries.
According to the ideological norm, society consisted of the three estates of the realm: The relationship between the classes was strictly hierarchical, with the nobility and clergy claiming worldly and spiritual overlordship over commoners.
Within the nobility and clergy there were also a number of ranks ranging from kings and popes to dukes , bishops and their subordinates, such as priests. One was expected to remain in one's social class and to respect the authority of the ruling classes. Political power was displayed not just by rule, but also by displaying wealth. Nobles dined on fresh game seasoned with exotic spices, and displayed refined table manners; rough laborers could make do with coarse barley bread, salt pork and beans and were not expected to display etiquette.
Even dietary recommendations were different: The digestive system of a lord was held to be more discriminating than that of his rustic subordinates and demanded finer foods. In the late Middle Ages, the increasing wealth of middle class merchants and traders meant that commoners began emulating the aristocracy, and threatened to break down some of the symbolic barriers between the nobility and the lower classes.
The response came in two forms: Medical science of the Middle Ages had a considerable influence on what was considered healthy and nutritious among the upper classes.
One's lifestyle—including diet, exercise, appropriate social behavior, and approved medical remedies—was the way to good health, and all types of food were assigned certain properties that affected a person's health. All foodstuffs were also classified on scales ranging from hot to cold and moist to dry, according to the four bodily humours theory proposed by Galen that dominated Western medical science from late Antiquity until the 17th century.
Medieval scholars considered human digestion to be a process similar to cooking. The processing of food in the stomach was seen as a continuation of the preparation initiated by the cook. In order for the food to be properly "cooked" and for the nutrients to be properly absorbed, it was important that the stomach be filled in an appropriate manner. Easily digestible foods would be consumed first, followed by gradually heavier dishes. If this regimen were not respected it was believed that heavy foods would sink to the bottom of the stomach, thus blocking the digestion duct, so that food would digest very slowly and cause putrefaction of the body and draw bad humours into the stomach.
It was also of vital importance that food of differing properties not be mixed. Before a meal, the stomach would preferably be "opened" with an apéritif from Latin aperire , "to open" that was preferably of a hot and dry nature: As the stomach had been opened, it should then be "closed" at the end of the meal with the help of a digestive, most commonly a dragée , which during the Middle Ages consisted of lumps of spiced sugar, or hypocras , a wine flavoured with fragrant spices, along with aged cheese.
A meal would ideally begin with easily digestible fruit, such as apples. It would then be followed by vegetables such as lettuce , cabbage , purslane , herbs, moist fruits, light meats, such as chicken or goat kid , with potages and broths. After that came the "heavy" meats, such as pork and beef , as well as vegetables and nuts, including pears and chestnuts, both considered difficult to digest.
It was popular, and recommended by medical expertise, to finish the meal with aged cheese and various digestives. The most ideal food was that which most closely matched the humour of human beings, i. Food should preferably also be finely chopped, ground, pounded and strained to achieve a true mixture of all the ingredients.
White wine was believed to be cooler than red and the same distinction was applied to red and white vinegar. Milk was moderately warm and moist, but the milk of different animals was often believed to differ. Egg yolks were considered to be warm and moist while the whites were cold and moist. Skilled cooks were expected to conform to the regimen of humoral medicine. Even if this limited the combinations of food they could prepare, there was still ample room for artistic variation by the chef.
The caloric content and structure of medieval diet varied over time, from region to region, and between classes. However, for most people, the diet tended to be high-carbohydrate, with most of the budget spent on, and the majority of calories provided by, cereals and alcohol such as beer.
Even though meat was highly valued by all, lower classes often could not afford it, nor were they allowed by the church to consume it every day. In one early 15th-century English aristocratic household for which detailed records are available that of the Earl of Warwick , gentle members of the household received a staggering 3. In the household of Henry Stafford in , gentle members received 2. In monasteries, the basic structure of the diet was laid down by the Rule of Saint Benedict in the 7th century and tightened by Pope Benedict XII in , but as mentioned above monks were adept at "working around" these rules.
This was circumvented in part by declaring that offal , and various processed foods such as bacon , were not meat. Secondly, Benedictine monasteries contained a room called the misericord , where the Rule of Saint Benedict did not apply, and where a large number of monks ate.
Each monk would be regularly sent either to the misericord or to the refectory. When Pope Benedict XII ruled that at least half of all monks should be required to eat in the refectory on any given day, monks responded by excluding the sick and those invited to the abbot's table from the reckoning.
The overall caloric intake is subject to some debate. As a consequence of these excesses, obesity was common among upper classes. The regional specialties that are a feature of early modern and contemporary cuisine were not in evidence in the sparser documentation that survives. Instead, medieval cuisine can be differentiated by the cereals and the oils that shaped dietary norms and crossed ethnic and, later, national boundaries.
Geographical variation in eating was primarily the result of differences in climate, political administration, and local customs that varied across the continent. Though sweeping generalizations should be avoided, more or less distinct areas where certain foodstuffs dominated can be discerned. In the British Isles , northern France , the Low Countries , the northern German-speaking areas, Scandinavia and the Baltic , the climate was generally too harsh for the cultivation of grapes and olives.
In the south, wine was the common drink for both rich and poor alike though the commoner usually had to settle for cheap second pressing wine while beer was the commoner's drink in the north and wine an expensive import. Citrus fruits though not the kinds most common today and pomegranates were common around the Mediterranean. Dried figs and dates were available in the north, but were used rather sparingly in cooking. Olive oil was a ubiquitous ingredient in Mediterranean cultures, but remained an expensive import in the north where oils of poppy , walnut, hazel and filbert were the most affordable alternatives.
Butter and lard , especially after the terrible mortality during the Black Death made them less scarce, were used in considerable quantities in the northern and northwestern regions, especially in the Low Countries. Almost universal in middle and upper class cooking all over Europe was the almond , which was in the ubiquitous and highly versatile almond milk , which was used as a substitute in dishes that otherwise required eggs or milk, though the bitter variety of almonds came along much later.
In Europe there were typically two meals a day: The two-meal system remained consistent throughout the late Middle Ages. Smaller intermediate meals were common, but became a matter of social status, as those who did not have to perform manual labor could go without them. For practical reasons, breakfast was still eaten by working men, and was tolerated for young children, women, the elderly and the sick.
Because the church preached against gluttony and other weaknesses of the flesh, men tended to be ashamed of the weak practicality of breakfast. Lavish dinner banquets and late-night reresopers from Occitan rèire-sopar , "late supper" with considerable amounts of alcoholic beverage were considered immoral.
The latter were especially associated with gambling, crude language, drunkenness, and lewd behavior. As with almost every part of life at the time, a medieval meal was generally a communal affair. The entire household, including servants, would ideally dine together. To sneak off to enjoy private company was considered a haughty and inefficient egotism in a world where people depended very much on each other.
When possible, rich hosts retired with their consorts to private chambers where the meal could be enjoyed in greater exclusivity and privacy. Being invited to a lord's chambers was a great privilege and could be used as a way to reward friends and allies and to awe subordinates. It allowed lords to distance themselves further from the household and to enjoy more luxurious treats while serving inferior food to the rest of the household that still dined in the great hall.
At major occasions and banquets, however, the host and hostess generally dined in the great hall with the other diners. However, it can be assumed there were no such extravagant luxuries as multiple courses , luxurious spices or hand-washing in scented water in everyday meals.
Things were different for the wealthy. Before the meal and between courses, shallow basins and linen towels were offered to guests so they could wash their hands, as cleanliness was emphasized. Social codes made it difficult for women to uphold the ideal of immaculate neatness and delicacy while enjoying a meal, so the wife of the host often dined in private with her entourage or ate very little at such feasts.
She could then join dinner only after the potentially messy business of eating was done. Overall, fine dining was a predominantly male affair, and it was uncommon for anyone but the most honored of guests to bring his wife or her ladies-in-waiting. The hierarchical nature of society was reinforced by etiquette where the lower ranked were expected to help the higher, the younger to assist the elder, and men to spare women the risk of sullying dress and reputation by having to handle food in an unwomanly fashion.
Shared drinking cups were common even at lavish banquets for all but those who sat at the high table , as was the standard etiquette of breaking bread and carving meat for one's fellow diners. Food was mostly served on plates or in stew pots, and diners would take their share from the dishes and place it on trenchers of stale bread, wood or pewter with the help of spoons or bare hands.
In lower-class households it was common to eat food straight off the table. Knives were used at the table, but most people were expected to bring their own, and only highly favored guests would be given a personal knife. A knife was usually shared with at least one other dinner guest, unless one was of very high rank or well-acquainted with the host.
Forks for eating were not in widespread usage in Europe until the early modern period , and early on were limited to Italy. Even there it was not until the 14th century that the fork became common among Italians of all social classes. The change in attitudes can be illustrated by the reactions to the table manners of the Byzantine princess Theodora Doukaina in the late 11th century.
She was the wife of Domenico Selvo , the Doge of Venice , and caused considerable dismay among upstanding Venetians. The foreign consort's insistence on having her food cut up by her eunuch servants and then eating the pieces with a golden fork shocked and upset the diners so much that there was a claim that Peter Damian , Cardinal Bishop of Ostia , later interpreted her refined foreign manners as pride and referred to her as " All types of cooking involved the direct use of fire.
Kitchen stoves did not appear until the 18th century, and cooks had to know how to cook directly over an open fire. Ovens were used, but they were expensive to construct and only existed in fairly large households and bakeries. It was common for a community to have shared ownership of an oven to ensure that the bread baking essential to everyone was made communal rather than private.
There were also portable ovens designed to be filled with food and then buried in hot coals, and even larger ones on wheels that were used to sell pies in the streets of medieval towns. But for most people, almost all cooking was done in simple stewpots, since this was the most efficient use of firewood and did not waste precious cooking juices, making potages and stews the most common dishes.
This was considered less of a problem in a time of back-breaking toil, famine, and a greater acceptance—even desirability—of plumpness; only the poor or sick, and devout ascetics , were thin.
Fruit was readily combined with meat, fish and eggs. The recipe for Tart de brymlent , a fish pie from the recipe collection Forme of Cury , includes a mix of figs , raisins , apples and pears with fish salmon , codling or haddock and pitted damson plums under the top crust. This meant that food had to be "tempered" according to its nature by an appropriate combination of preparation and mixing certain ingredients, condiments and spices; fish was seen as being cold and moist, and best cooked in a way that heated and dried it, such as frying or oven baking, and seasoned with hot and dry spices; beef was dry and hot and should therefore be boiled ; pork was hot and moist and should therefore always be roasted.
In a recipe for quince pie, cabbage is said to work equally well, and in another turnips could be replaced by pears. The completely edible shortcrust pie did not appear in recipes until the 15th century.
Before that the pastry was primarily used as a cooking container in a technique known as ' huff paste '. Extant recipe collections show that gastronomy in the Late Middle Ages developed significantly.
New techniques, like the shortcrust pie and the clarification of jelly with egg whites began to appear in recipes in the late 14th century and recipes began to include detailed instructions instead of being mere memory aids to an already skilled cook. In most households, cooking was done on an open hearth in the middle of the main living area, to make efficient use of the heat. This was the most common arrangement, even in wealthy households, for most of the Middle Ages, where the kitchen was combined with the dining hall.
Towards the Late Middle Ages a separate kitchen area began to evolve. The first step was to move the fireplaces towards the walls of the main hall, and later to build a separate building or wing that contained a dedicated kitchen area, often separated from the main building by a covered arcade.
This way, the smoke, odors and bustle of the kitchen could be kept out of sight of guests, and the fire risk lessened. Many basic variations of cooking utensils available today, such as frying pans , pots , kettles , and waffle irons , already existed, although they were often too expensive for poorer households. Other tools more specific to cooking over an open fire were spits of various sizes, and material for skewering anything from delicate quails to whole oxen.
Utensils were often held directly over the fire or placed into embers on tripods. To assist the cook there were also assorted knives, stirring spoons, ladles and graters. In wealthy households one of the most common tools was the mortar and sieve cloth, since many medieval recipes called for food to be finely chopped, mashed, strained and seasoned either before or after cooking.
This was based on a belief among physicians that the finer the consistency of food, the more effectively the body would absorb the nourishment. It also gave skilled cooks the opportunity to elaborately shape the results. Fine-textured food was also associated with wealth; for example, finely milled flour was expensive, while the bread of commoners was typically brown and coarse. A typical procedure was farcing from the Latin farcio , "to cram" , to skin and dress an animal, grind up the meat and mix it with spices and other ingredients and then return it into its own skin, or mold it into the shape of a completely different animal.
The kitchen staff of huge noble or royal courts occasionally numbered in the hundreds: While an average peasant household often made do with firewood collected from the surrounding woodlands, the major kitchens of households had to cope with the logistics of daily providing at least two meals for several hundred people. Guidelines on how to prepare for a two-day banquet can be found in the cookbook Du fait de cuisine "On cookery" written in in part to compete with the court of Burgundy  by Maistre Chiquart, master chef of Amadeus VIII, Duke of Savoy.
Food preservation methods were basically the same as had been used since antiquity, and did not change much until the invention of canning in the early 19th century. The most common and simplest method was to expose foodstuffs to heat or wind to remove moisture , thereby prolonging the durability if not the flavor of almost any type of food from cereals to meats; the drying of food worked by drastically reducing the activity of various water-dependent microorganisms that cause decay.
In any case, best of luck — let us know how it goes! I was pretty pleased to find this web site and your cost breakdown is very detailed. Thanks for all of the information — it makes my decision a lot easier. Hopefully can report back with some great results. Thanks for all of the information. Makes my decision a lot easier knowing exactly what things are going to cost! Need to loose about 59 pounds. Thank you for the sensible critique and cost info.
Mostly fish and vegetables. Sometimes chicken or turkey but not all the time! Is there a plan to start me on this regiment? Can you send some ideas and pricing plans?
I tried turbo shakes with other companies and they gave me lots of gas…lol Thanks if this gets to you. Hi Jim — sorry, I missed this comment at the time you posted it. I would also recommend looking at BistroMD https: Diet-to-Go has some really good plans that sound like they could work for you. Both are going to be a bit more pricey than Nutrisystem, but sound like they could be a better fit. My husband and I are considering NS. We also do not want to purchase ANY other food if possible.
Hi Lynn — I replied to Ray with a couple of other options BistroMD and Diet-to-Go …I would recommend checking out those reviews if you think they may be something that would work for you and your husband. There are definitely some ways to keep the costs down though. You will definitely want to incorporate fresh produce, though, as I think you would get tired of only eating their pre-made meals, and you will want to mix in a salad or something on most days just to get the health benefits from the fresh produce if nothing else.
Hi Pete — the frozen food is an additional charge, but can be included in your 4-week order or as an ala carte item. Many are on a fixed income and I am one of them … an older woman, a widow, and on a very fixed income.
With the profit your company surely must realize, might you consider offering your program free to a few deserving people men and women who would benefit from it as well?
Just something you might consider … it just might be of benefit to your company in another way … good will! The Costco purchased gift cards can definitely be used and there is a space at checkout to put them in. You will just have to make sure you put the gift card in a few days before the processing date for additional deliveries. I just went through this whole process and received my order today.
Thanks for the very thorough cost information. Helped make my decision a lot easier. I agree, too, the frozen meals are definitely a nice bonus — especially the desserts!
There are some costs with buying your own fruits or vegetables to consider too, but overall it seems fairly affordable. Anyways, thanks for the detailed pricing breakdown, really appreciate it.
Is it organic or are there a lot of preservatives in It. Hi Isabel — Thanks for visiting. Hi Arlene — Thanks for visiting. I have always found it to be very easy to opt out. As long as you stay on the program for at least two months, you should be able to cancel without paying any type of penalty if you need to cancel after month 1 I mention one way to avoid the penalty in the review above , and customer service has always been very easy to deal with when I have needed to call them.
I live in Ottawa Ontario Canada. Where in Canada can I join. Are the costs of the meals increased to take in the difference between the American and Canadian do. Also what about duty and taxes, as well as shipping fees. I am a woman ,77 yrs old and need to lose at least 25 lbs. Please try to enlighten me. Thank you very much for your assistance. What exactly is in the Turbo Shakes?