> Why Is the American Diet So Deadly?
Not enough fiber (fruits, veg).
Fats demonized for a long spell.
No time for preparing whole foods in daily lives.
No easy access to cheap, prepared whole foods.
Edit: car-focused culture and zoning laws/planning that result in more sedentary day-to-day lifestyle that magnifies the effect of the poor diet.
Apples, Bananas, Carrots, Milk.
I imagine there are other foods too. But its weird to see people think they don't exist.
Those you listed also aren't prepared.
If you go to Asia -- Japan, Taiwan for example -- you'll find cheap, fresh, prepared whole foods everywhere to the extent that many households have very small refrigerators and many families have access to prepared whole foods even without having to expend the time cost of cooking at home.
For a dual-income household, this is a big win.
There's various reasons for this: lower labor costs, smaller land mass/higher density, better access to local/fresh ingredients, more favorable climate and longer growing seasons, etc.
Beyond macro-nutrients, what I think the true reason food in the US is bad is because of the other stuff. Many things banned in Europe (which is special because they use science for improving quality of life before profits) are not banned in the US, even though it's an advanced enough nation to be able to deal with the ban and look for better options.
The problem in the US is that profits are of utmost importance. Anything that lowers your costs is good for business as long as it's hard to point at it (does colourant X cause cancer? maybe we need more studies, or just didn't know, we'll try better next time).
Also, with a pinch of pedestrian-hostile design, where some places don't even have sidewalks.
Yes, if you cut the carbs the problem is solved, but there are different kinds of carbs and some kinds in moderation can be eaten regularly without causing big glucose spikes and metabolic disease.
Personally I go for low carb to make it easier, but I still eat limited fruit and starchy vegetables and rice and beans. (Some kinds of fruit do spike glucose and I need to be careful with.)
I'm not sure why people think fiber is great. Yes it pushes things through. Yes there are bacteria that eat it. So does other food.
But it also makes you go poop more often, which is bad for your body.
I mostly eat meats and relatively low fiber food. I don't track it closely, so occasionally I'll eat corn and it passes through.
---
My point:
"Why fiber?" Actually prove that the generic intake of 'fiber' is good. There are so many different types of fiber, the macro size of the fiber matters(ground pinto beans has a different gastro effect than whole), the actual molecules its made of, etc..
Does this actually work for anyone? I eat these high fiber foods that get suggested and i never feel full for hours.
Fiber fills you up now by taking up physical volume. Try eating the equivalent of 200 calories of broc vs 200 calories of bread or pasta. The problem is that your body can't digest fiber so the digestive system moves it along quickly!
Fat and protein extends the feeling of satiation by turning off the hormonal signals for hunger.
If you eat an apple, try it with two tablespoons of peanut butter (the kind with only peanuts and salt). If you eat a serving of carrots, add two whole hard boiled eggs.
An example, im targeting 2200-2400 calories. with 3 600 calorie meals (which tbh is pretty hard to do 7 or 800 is more likely) , there isn't that much buffer to add stuff like thhat.
Carbs give a type of satiety I can't replicate with unlimited fat/protein/fibre. IMHO it's not actually hunger/stomach related but relief from withdrawal symptoms. Carbs are CNS stimulants that trigger serotonin release and very addictive to me at least.
After fasting or eating keto for a sufficient duration this carb specific form of absence/satiety no longer exists. Hunger/appetite stops feeling like a gnawing craving desire, instead it feels like a more neutral empty/weak signal.
Anyway, if eating carbs, best bang for buck satiety is the potato.
> I mostly eat meats and relatively low fiber food.
Are you Hank Hill? Pooping in a choleric or diarrhea sense is bad; pooping once a day is fine. How often is more often?
Fiber is good for me because it acts as a stool softener.
In my 40's, I had several bouts of diverticulitis. Hard stool may have been a contributing factor in developing the underlying issue, diverticulosis. I suspect more fiber would have made this less likely.
Later, due to the recurring diverticulitis, I had elective surgery to remove the problematic section of my colon. The surgeon cautioned me to ensure my stool stays soft, so that the place where he stitched my remaining colon back together are at lower risk of opening up. This is a long-term concern, so I'll be careful about it for the rest of my life.
Also, IIUC, straining to pass hard stool increases the risk of swollen hemorrhoids, which nobody enjoys.
Because a diet rich in fiber has been repeatedly found to significantly reduce the chance of early death?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026156142...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25552267/
https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10...
(You can find many more)
Literally thousands of studies with one of the clearest results in nutritional science, frankly.
Self reported. Oh boy. No control. haha.
So... is this not science? Its induction?
Since fiber correlates with healthy food, I believe that is what we are seeing. Where as eating sugar and oil has no fiber. However its not like we are having a meat eater compared directly.
I come from chemistry, not sociology. The replication crisis has been kind to me, and terrible for biology and beyond.
If you’re straining to crap because you don’t eat enough fibre, sure.