Why were Americans of all ages so thin during the 1960s and 1970s?

[Anonymous]

Because people refuse to believe that you gain weight EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. you eat something. Their diet regimen consists of eating constantly in the name of "health."

Do what people did in the 60's and 70's. Eat more air.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, where exactly are you getting your premise that everyone was so thin back then? Are you looking at photos or movies or something? I was alive then and I remember seeing people of all sizes, with plenty who were on the heavy side.

I lived in a pretty international neighborhood, with a lot of immigrants from various countries, so that might have affected the looks of the people I sàw regularly. But even still, we were out and about in many places and I saw a wide range of sizes of people everywhere we went.

OP, are you out there? Can you give some background on what you're basing your ideas about how people looked in the 60s and 70s? Thanks!

LMAO that you've ignored streams of data of how much fatter we are and asking OP to verify it.

This is a totally different point: how much fatter we are. No one is debating that. What is being questioned is the notion that the entire population was very thin in 1970. Do you see the difference in those two points?

No there have always been fatties. There are just more now.

But the OP said that people of all ages were so thin during the 60s and 70s. We're asking what that assumption is based on.

It's not an assumption. It's a fact which has been studied for decades. One example of reporting research: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/12/look-at-how-much-weight-weve-gained-since-the-1960s/?utm_term=.49540e50ed9a

You are not posting any information about people being very thin in the 60s and 70s. You continue to post information about how fat people are NOW. Do you really not see the difference???? There's a difference between people being fat now and people being very thin in the 70's. Is this not clear to you?

NP. are we reading a different article? The one PP just posted has a very clear graph that shows how much heaver the average woman has gotten since the 1960s/70s. What exactlya re you looking for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we start things off badly now, with this idea that babies and toddlers need to snack all the time.
From the earliest days, my kids got three meals a day, and one snack (whether the snack was in the morning or afternoon depended on when their naps were. That is, when they had the longest awake stretch between meals.)

And they never ate on the run. Snacks were eaten at the table, just like meals. They didn't drink milk all the time like so many kids. Or juice. All they drank was water.

I know people will say I was a mean mom, but they never asked for snacks between times. One result of the meal schedule was that when they did have meals or a snack, they ate more than their peers, because they'd actually waited long enough to work up an appetite. (This also helped them be less picky eaters, in my opinion.)

Call me a sanctimommy if you want, but I feel it worked well to snack less. (and yes, there were exceptions to the rule if there needed to be. But my kids never begged for food. They were too busy!) I think too many parents offer food as appeasement (you're upset? Want a yogurt?) or as a reward (you've been so good! Let's get an ice cream!)

My mom's rule was that we could have fresh fruit and vegetables at any time, but if we didn't want those, we weren't really hungry and were not allowed a snack outside of set times. Snack was served after school, and was cookies and milk or something. We had dessert pretty much every night, but at least half the time it was fruit. (The other times it was cake or ice cream.) I do think that the constant snacking is a problem. I'm okay with a mid-morning and mid-afternoon snack, but food every 30 minutes is too much. I tell my kids that it's okay to feel hungry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of theories here but I think it's a combination of factors. People are pinging in on the theories that illustrate differences between their own childhoods. But everybody grew up differently. I think a lot of the theories too are based on your own biases.

The studies show that generally we are taking in about 20% more calories now than we did decades ago. we ate fluffernutters and Twinkies and Stouffer's meals back then; we eat better now, but we eat more.

I think therd are also maybe chemical and hormonal imbalances in play, and for childhood obesity, definitely a more sedentary lifestyle. But we adults aren't any more sedentary now than we were.

I

I think most adults are more sedentary than they were in childhood. An hour of physical education M-F plus playtime after school or sports practice for two hours really adds up. If you were athletic as a kid you were getting 3 hours of solid physical exercise everyday and more on the weekends.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s the bigger portions and hormones in the food.

We are like crap when I was growing up... sugar cereal, kool aid, soda, little Debbie cakes multiple times per day, lots of homemade baked goods too, tons of red meat especially fatty ground chuck, and every casserole was some variation of cream of mushroom soup, chicken, and tons of canned veggies. But we moved and played and were very active!

Even slim little girls get breast buds and periods very early these days. Fourteen was perfectly normal when I was growing up and now 14 is ancient if you’ve not started your period.

[Anonymous]

There was no household computer, gaming system, or social media to make you sedentary. And work was left at the office so you engaged in physical movement instead of replying to emails after dinner for example.

[Anonymous]

It wasn't the food. It was just the level of physical activity. I'm 50 and as a kid in the 70s/80s if something wasn't on TV, you didn't watch TV. There weren't many options. We had video game systems but they weren't as immersive. Games were one and done...no drawn out campaigns or online components. You played a few games and then went outside with your friends. Summer days weren't planned out. You went outside in the morning and returned when the street lights came on. Most of the time in between consisted of physical activity.

Now, everything is geared to have you sit down and consume. Companies make more money that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, where exactly are you getting your premise that everyone was so thin back then? Are you looking at photos or movies or something? I was alive then and I remember seeing people of all sizes, with plenty who were on the heavy side.

I lived in a pretty international neighborhood, with a lot of immigrants from various countries, so that might have affected the looks of the people I sàw regularly. But even still, we were out and about in many places and I saw a wide range of sizes of people everywhere we went.

OP, are you out there? Can you give some background on what you're basing your ideas about how people looked in the 60s and 70s? Thanks!

LMAO that you've ignored streams of data of how much fatter we are and asking OP to verify it.

This is a totally different point: how much fatter we are. No one is debating that. What is being questioned is the notion that the entire population was very thin in 1970. Do you see the difference in those two points?

No there have always been fatties. There are just more now.

But the OP said that people of all ages were so thin during the 60s and 70s. We're asking what that assumption is based on.

It's not an assumption. It's a fact which has been studied for decades. One example of reporting research: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/12/look-at-how-much-weight-weve-gained-since-the-1960s/?utm_term=.49540e50ed9a

You are not posting any information about people being very thin in the 60s and 70s. You continue to post information about how fat people are NOW. Do you really not see the difference???? There's a difference between people being fat now and people being very thin in the 70's. Is this not clear to you?

NP. are we reading a different article? The one PP just posted has a very clear graph that shows how much heaver the average woman has gotten since the 1960s/70s. What exactlya re you looking for?

This article says the average woman weighed 140 in 1970. How is that very thin?

[Anonymous]

Portions were smaller, more movement and fewer electronics, and middle class and poorer people rarely went out to eat.

I was a kid then, we ate out one-time a week max and that included fast food and any pre-prepared meals (like fried chicken.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we start things off badly now, with this idea that babies and toddlers need to snack all the time.
From the earliest days, my kids got three meals a day, and one snack (whether the snack was in the morning or afternoon depended on when their naps were. That is, when they had the longest awake stretch between meals.)

And they never ate on the run. Snacks were eaten at the table, just like meals. They didn't drink milk all the time like so many kids. Or juice. All they drank was water.

I know people will say I was a mean mom, but they never asked for snacks between times. One result of the meal schedule was that when they did have meals or a snack, they ate more than their peers, because they'd actually waited long enough to work up an appetite. (This also helped them be less picky eaters, in my opinion.)

Call me a sanctimommy if you want, but I feel it worked well to snack less. (and yes, there were exceptions to the rule if there needed to be. But my kids never begged for food. They were too busy!) I think too many parents offer food as appeasement (you're upset? Want a yogurt?) or as a reward (you've been so good! Let's get an ice cream!)

My mom's rule was that we could have fresh fruit and vegetables at any time, but if we didn't want those, we weren't really hungry and were not allowed a snack outside of set times. Snack was served after school, and was cookies and milk or something. We had dessert pretty much every night, but at least half the time it was fruit. (The other times it was cake or ice cream.) I do think that the constant snacking is a problem. I'm okay with a mid-morning and mid-afternoon snack, but food every 30 minutes is too much. I tell my kids that it's okay to feel hungry.

Our dessert was fruit too. On summer nights though we each got a coin (don't remember if it was a nickel or dime, very cheap!) to get something from the ice cream man.

The excitement when you heard that music! But we only got that one portion so when it was gone, it was gone.

[Anonymous]

My mom was a great cook back in the day:

fish sticks and tater tots
tuna casserole with bbq chips on top
meatloaf with a ketchup glaze
hot dogs wrapped in croissant dough (pigs in a blanket)

sometimes we went to McDonalds, 47 cents for a three course meal!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Haha, in the 70s, they advertised that same meal and touted that you could buy it ànd get change back from your dollar! And that is with a milk shake, not a soda!

[Anonymous]

The milkshake was likely tiny, and only came in one size. Like fries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, where exactly are you getting your premise that everyone was so thin back then? Are you looking at photos or movies or something? I was alive then and I remember seeing people of all sizes, with plenty who were on the heavy side.

I lived in a pretty international neighborhood, with a lot of immigrants from various countries, so that might have affected the looks of the people I sàw regularly. But even still, we were out and about in many places and I saw a wide range of sizes of people everywhere we went.

OP, are you out there? Can you give some background on what you're basing your ideas about how people looked in the 60s and 70s? Thanks!

LMAO that you've ignored streams of data of how much fatter we are and asking OP to verify it.

This is a totally different point: how much fatter we are. No one is debating that. What is being questioned is the notion that the entire population was very thin in 1970. Do you see the difference in those two points?

No there have always been fatties. There are just more now.

But the OP said that people of all ages were so thin during the 60s and 70s. We're asking what that assumption is based on.

It's not an assumption. It's a fact which has been studied for decades. One example of reporting research: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/12/look-at-how-much-weight-weve-gained-since-the-1960s/?utm_term=.49540e50ed9a

You are not posting any information about people being very thin in the 60s and 70s. You continue to post information about how fat people are NOW. Do you really not see the difference???? There's a difference between people being fat now and people being very thin in the 70's. Is this not clear to you?

NP. are we reading a different article? The one PP just posted has a very clear graph that shows how much heaver the average woman has gotten since the 1960s/70s. What exactlya re you looking for?

This article says the average woman weighed 140 in 1970. How is that very thin?

Yes, how is 140 lbs. "so thin"?