My French grandparents lived until they were 100, were perfectly content, had 8 kids, ate great food during long meals and drank lots of wine. I don't think they jogged a day in their lives.
That might describe some parts of America, but it's definitely not universal. The German immigrants that formed the generation before me were drinking more and exercising less. They were also farmers, so they didn't need to exercise.
I would argue that it's the heavy influence of immigrants from all over the world that caused the self-help obsession. Those who came here weren't a random sample from their home countries. Immigration was itself a form of self-help.
Sometimes this is seen by policy-makers as indicative of a problem with the native population. Sometimes this is cast as immigrants taking over.
The reality is rather straightforward, imo. The type of person willing and able to uproot themselves from their parent culture and set their sails for new opportunity is a huge selection event, in and of itself. It's no wonder that the most driven percentage of humanity turns out to be the most successful.
(This is also why I think the US would only benefit from much less restrictive immigration policy, but that is a discussion for another thread.)
i don't think they were sitting all day eating highly processed food either.
Obviously something gets lost in the macro nutrients/vitamin content - but I don't think I've seen a formal study of why they are different.
I'm also very curious how much better US health would be if we could wave a magic wand and replace all sugary drinks with water. 64oz of sugar-water with a meal is a lot, but not uncommon thanks to free refills and helpful waiters always topping everyone off. Lots of people have way more than that on an average day, too. I'm sure it wouldn't fix (anywhere near) everything, but I bet that single factor is an awful lot of the cause of dietary-related illness rate differences between the US and other countries. The others have soda too, but it doesn't flow as freely and cheaply as here[0], and enormous cups/bottles of the stuff multiple times a day isn't common most places.
[0] With some exceptions—I understand Mexico, for example, consumes lots of sugary soda.
Why do consumers often think that the smaller portion is more filling when eating a properly proportioned french meal than the equivalent calories from McDonalds?
Food pricing, especially at chain restaurants and fast-food joints, tends to support this. It's not uncommon to pay 20% more for double the food, either because larger sizes aren't much more expensive than smaller ones, or thanks to "combo" meals. Restaurants seem to be optimizing for total sales, not margin on individual items, based on how they price—in many cases their entire menu seems to exist only to make the "combo meal" look like a good deal, but of course it may be more food than you really wanted.
To say nothing of the phenomenon of all-you-can-eat buffets...
Some of it's food culture. Giant portions are normal so you don't think twice about piling your plate high. Norms (and, yes, judgement/shaming) about consumption affect patterns of same. Snacking, even heavy snacking, between meals, is common. This may be suppressed elsewhere by stronger "you eat at meal times—if not exclusively, then nearly so" norms, and snack-availability that's about what you'd expect, given those norms.
Some people think our commonly-accessible "good" food (fruits, veggies, not from specialty stores, just the main produce section of normal grocery stores) are a lot worse than what's normal in some other, healthier countries. I don't have enough experience to claim anything definitive on this, but what experience I do have does support it. If "good" food doesn't taste as good as elsewhere, or if getting something as good as others' normal produce requires special shopping and much higher prices, maybe one tends to reach for umami-bomb fat+starch garbage, which is both kinda-addictive and not very filling.
A lot of our standard cooking is tied up heavily with giant portions. We even seem to do this with imported cuisines, for whatever reason. Not-especially-good food in giant portions. Heaping plates of mediocre pasta+sauce as our image of Italian food, Mexican food with bottomless chips & salsa (and huge, cheese-slathered plates for the entrees), that kind of thing. I guess that's more of the food-culture thing.
I doubt any of these are all of the reason, and maybe none of them are correct at all.
On the other hand, foods like rice, potatoes, etc do.
[1] https://www.webmd.com/diet/features/satiety-new-diet-weapon (soft ref, appropriate grain of salt)
Way, way more stores having very late or even 24/7 hours than before has probably further disrupted any norms and culture we had about when & where to eat—not just for the shoppers who have those wares available more hours of the day, but I'm thinking especially of the workers—believe it or not, young'uns, but as recently as the early 2000s almost everything in the US but certain districts of major cities were shut down and dead by a reasonable hour.
Another, possibly minor factor: I have a suspicion we have more waking hours per day, on average, than Americans did 50 years ago. You can't eat (snack) when you're sleeping, even if food's available.
There’s various other confounding factors such as how and when you eat, and ultimately your relationship with food.
There is plenty of research linking processed food with health risks.
You don't make food cheaper by reducing the quality of ingrediants since decent ingredients are still really cheap. You make food cheaper by making it more preserved.
A lot of food cost is in waste and spoilage. Cheap foods are typically things that handle well and don't perish easily.
You accomplish this by adding more fat, more salt, and heavily processing food. You strip all the bacteria and cultures from it and you can get a tv dinner to last a decade if it's packaged well.
On the other hand, gourmet food is all prone to spoilage. Squeaky cheese curds, fresh pasta, homemade tortillas, etc.
I think America really has figured out the difference and that information is pretty easily accessible - but if you're working twelve hours then you'll grab the five dollar TV dinner and just ignore the downsides.
Opportunity knocking, are you listening?
I think this is part of the reason the US has been so successful and innovative. Hard work and improvement are seen as virtues here. A life of sloth and mediocrity, avoiding work and relying on the government to provide for you was not seen as something good until recently. I hope the essence of America isn't lost forever: industry, innovation, and individualism.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-under-pressu...
> America is built mostly on immigrant work ethic
Isn't it interesting how many believe the US was solely built by immigrants, slaves, and natives. I wonder what American citizens did during this time?
> the collapse of the european powers
The US was already inventing and building in the 1800s, no collapse needed.
> Not sure america is that special, just lucky - right place, right time.
It's easy to ascribe luck to anything successful. You could say Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc were nothing special, just lucky - right place, right time, but I don't think that's true.
While I love my kids, I don't consider it an achievement.
And hedonism seems great until you climb the hedonic treadmill. Your claim of the "content" life leaves lots to disect.
If I may hazard a guess: Quebecois?
I lived in Toronto for a few years, with the occasional trip to Montreal. I definitely noticed a cultural difference between the provinces—Quebec was rather less stressed out, whereas Ontario is just as tight-assed Protestant as the Midwest. (Maybe more so. Can’t buy wine at a grocery store? Raw uncut Calvinism.)
By the time mergers and acquisitions left it to be owned completely by foreign interests, all while Ontario's emerging craft beer scene were prohibited from inclusion, there was absolutely no excuse for it anymore. How the 2015 Master Framework Agreement got signed continues to boggle the mind.
Rural Ontario has allowed the sale of alcohol (all kinds) in grocery and corner stores since the 1960s. It is amazing how slow the rest of the province is to catch up. It took until the year 2000 for Toronto to fully let go of being dry.
Furthermore some of us exercise not just for the sake of it, we do it to enable us to become better at activities that we enjoy. I enjoy being able to track my measurable improvement at sports such as tennis and badminton as a result of my going to the gym and work on high intensity interval training, anaerobics, etc.
My (100% American) grandpa also lived to 100...he also never exercised and even smoked for 20 years or so. He ate whatever he wanted but didn't over-eat candy and snacks, which I think is the main issue lots of people have.
It’s more about motivational-life-coach-metaphysical-wealth-manifestation-secrets.
And? What's your point?