[andreime]

We're also a lot more sedentary. I am convinced without being able to produce proof, that this is the biggest problem - the lack of physical work.

I used to believe we eat shit, but my ancestors were really poor and basically ate just a few food types most of their life. I think I've come a long way and am convinced that, even if I were to eat a very occasional McDonalds, it'd still be eating a lot better. It's a lot more diverse and that really makes a difference. Don't know about you but I very rarely eat the same thing two days in a row.

[Fishman343]

Nutritionally I see what you mean and definitely agree, people are taller than they used to be and until recently have lived longer. But all of the benefits a nutritionally diverse and rich diet brings are easily undone (and more) by also consuming enough sugar to become obese. This is why the current generation of obese kids at school have a lower life expectancy than their parents despite better healthcare and nutrition in their early years.

This is why I think that jumping on the "BPA must be the problem!" answer to low count question is a bit ridiculous, especially when people are becoming more unhealthy by the day. People who eat more processed sugary foods and drinks that come in BPA containing packaging are also more likely to be obese and unhealthy too.

Lacking physical work also does not account for all of the weight gain we are seeing at the moment - obesity rates remained stable in the '60s and '70s when we lived similarly lazy lives. (1)

1. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr043743#t=article

[astrange]

McDonalds is nutritionally well-balanced if you don't get a drink or fries.

I don't see how food being diverse makes it healthier though. You diversify against risk, is there risk here?