What Americans Eat; More Calories and Increased Restaurant Food Consumption

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal focusing on childhood obesity and federal initiatives to combat the problem included a very interesting chart that I present below (see: White House Obesity Plan Mixes Carrots With Sticks). In a very succinct fashion, it presents data that explains some of the major problems in the diets of Americans. Significant changes need to be made in order to address our obesity epidemic.

From 1978 to 2006, the average caloric intake of Americans has increase from 1,826 per day to 2,157, an increase of 331 calories (18%). I'm sure that during this same interval, the daily activity level of most U.S. adults has declined as they moved from jobs requiring physical activity to desk positions. In other words, decreased caloric burn and greater food consumption.

Note also in the chart the shift of the percentage of food not eaten at home from 18% to 37%. For me, these numbers illustrate one of our major challenges and part of the reason for our addiction to salt and sugar (see: Some Salty Facts Keeping to a Healthy Diet; Federal Tax on Soda Pop Proposed: Can This Be Justified?). Fast food restaurants enhance the flavor of their unhealthy but inexpensive food choices with these food additives (see: Will Posting Calorie Counts in Fast Food Restaurants Help Curb Obesity?). Sugary pop also constitutes one of their high-profit-margin items so they dispense it in "super" sizes.

I must admit that I was surprised by the decline in fat consumption since 1978 illustrated in this chart. I would have predicted that fat consumption has increased over recent years. One of the ways in which this can be explained is on the basis of our consumption of myriad "low fat" food products, nominally to improve our health. However, the advertised benefits of such foods is clearly not occurring (see: Obesity, Nutrigenomics, and the Clinical Laboratory).

So what is the take-home less from these data? First of all, we are consuming more calories than we burn and are thus getting heavier. Part of this trend clearly relates to fast-food consumption outside the home. I am not sure how to reverse this trend. Fast food is relatively cheap but not that nutritious. With two working parents as the norm in many families and reduced income for many of them, the appeal of inexpensive "outside" eating is apparent. In such an environment, I am not sure whether more nutritious choices or the posting of calorie counts will result in significant dietary changes.

Comments

[Cindy]

Proper diet set up for the individual and his goal is very important. We eat to many fast carbs and this not that much the fat makes the population mire and more obiese.

[Jo]

A lot of people indeed are taking into account of their food consumption hence the low fat consumption and the increase of carbs.

[Unhealthy foods]

Nice flowchart. It shows which are the food that's best for us to take. Actually, this is real. This was tried and tested.

[Food Consumption]

Although fat consumption has got reduced, other healthy diet like protein consumption hasn't increased..
https://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=batch_download&send_id=817789614&email=7cff47bb7cdcb76fbfa15e66c81a1961

[Karl Robstad]

Couple things:

Taking into account the increased percentage of meals eaten out, the fact that calories have increased is probably explained right here. I did some reading on Cheesecake Factory (aka why is every dish over 1000 calories), and I found a blog post that basically explained the economics behind it. Put simply, if you want to charge the most for your food, increase the portion size! Staff, rent, electricity etc. are all static costs, the greatest variable is the portion size. (general diet tip: ALWAYS split your meal when out and bring the other half home).

With reference to protein/carb/fat ratios we've actually improved since the 70's. A 40/30/30 split is generally optimal (40% being carbs).

Something not mentioned that's also important has been the decrease in saturated and trans-fats. As these have come into scrutiny by the public these have become less and less of a problem. On the chopping block now: processed carbs.

Finally, consider this: perhaps the increas in calories is actually healthy. What? Well think of it this way. In the 1970's we were thinner so we didn't need to eat as many calories to maintain healthy weights. Now, we are fatter, and while we don't want to maintain our fat weights, basic caloric needs increase with weight. As someone being on a diet now, when I started I had to eat 2700 calories a day to lose 2lbs a week! Now that I'm down some weight, I'm right at that 2,100 calorie line. Secretly, I tried to do a very low calorie diet (VLC) at around 1600 calories a day and my weight loss completely stopped and my body went into survival mode. Anyway, my point is that since we are larger as a nation, our daily caloric needs have assuredly increased as well... again, not meant to be an excuse to be fat, lol ;)

PS: I REALLY support government mandates of forcing restaurants to have the nutrition information available to patrons. I don't believe that its neccessary to put it on the menu along with the description, but to have a pamphlet available if a patron asks would be perfect. To go back to the Cheesecake Factory case, if you go to their website they tell you right there that they will not divulge that information (ridiculous!), however since it's already illegal in Washington state, someone there was kind enough to scan it in and post it on the internet, and O BOY are there some shockers in there. I found out that my favorite pasta dish was 2100 calories, for example!

Anyway. Interesting infographic and great article to keep everyone thinking about it!

-Karl

[Duke Briscoe]

The percent of calories from fat has declined, but notice that the absolute number of calories from fat has remained very steady at about 720. Most of the absolute change in calories has taken place in carbohydrates.