http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html

It is interesting to read a generalist socio-political 'why are americans fat?' article from a anit-sugar not ant-fat perspective!

Great writer, great read!

I agree its a good read, but not that its not anti fat, which it still is IMHO. We still have the calories in, calories out theory being promoted as if all calories no matter what the source, are supposedly treated equally by the body, which clearly they are not.

I also spent some time in France recently, and this business about the French only eating small meals seems to be based on the nouvelle cuisine phenomenon which was passe about 20 years ago - and even then would not have affected anyone who didn't eat in expensive restaurants. These days serving sizes are the same as anywhere else in Europe (or here) and there are considerably more McDonalds in France than England or Italy (or Australia).

The anthropologist Richard Wrangham, is also quoted saying that paleolithic man needed to control fire, and therefore cooking to advance because that enabled food to be made softer. His theory goes like this;

"People who think that meat dominated the diet of early Homo may well be right," he says, "but they would have to have spent five hours a day just chewing. Raw meat is very hard to chew, and presumably raw wild meat is even harder."

- sort of begs the question that our ancestors may well have evolved on a diet of the fattiest, softest bits of raw meat, in part because they wouldn't take five hours to chew, and also because they were the richest source of energy available. The control of fire is thought by most anthropologists, to be a much later development.

The really frustrating thing about an article like that, is that all the information is there, but people like Willett see only part of the picture when all that is required is to connect the remaining dots.

Cheers,

Malcolm

I don't know where you live in Oz, Malcolm, but here in SEQ there are Mac's everywhere, and worse, signs on the freeway advising you where the next one is, just in case you were worried about missing one! The only place I know of that has avoided one was Byron Bay where the citizenry flat refused to allow one in.

Do you remember the book The Day of the Triffids? Reminds me of that somehow. There was even one, to my disgust, in the main square in Cuernavaca, Mexico.

Val

I know its hard to believe, given the French reputation for being connoisseurs of fine food, but in France, it is worse. Whilst for obvious reasons I found a lot of the more traditional French cooking more to my taste, so I didn't eat a McDonalds while I was there, they were useful as we drove across the country as signposts to the nearest rest room!

"signposts to the nearest rest room"

The ONLY good thing about MacD, BK, Wendy's, et al. They all have bathrooms and none question why you're only using their facilities!

As one with bladder issues, it's always nice to see one of these places pop-up, because they're open and never question or try to restrict use of their bathrooms. Have to say, BK has saved me more than once (my experience has shown BK has the cleanest bathrooms....only BP gas stations are better) LOL

I can attest that Germany has it's share of McDonalds from my trip last year. It's actually the first place we ate as we sat down at one half a block from the bonnheim (train station) while waiting for our ride. Saw them everywhere. I even took a picture of one in Rothenburg o.d. Tabor. It fit right in to the 12th century town, even had an old-looking swinging sign outside with the golden arches on them. It was also true that they sell beer in German McD's, however is was non-alcoholic.