Okay, so what happened in/around 1980 that changed?

We have always ever preferred cheap/tasty/convenient food. That's not something new that started in 1980.

BUT: "cheap/tasty/convenient" used to mean a fried pork chop, rather than a Lean Cuisine meal. https://twitter.com/whsource/status/1357707701153714178

Post-DGA, one was "scary" and the other was "healthy." So which do you think people picked?

As for the "working moms theory," women entered the workforce en masse after WW2. It was a problem, since we had to employ returning GIs too, but didn't seem to affect obesity rates.

As for the "fast food/eating out" argument, spending on "food away from home" has been rising steadily since the 1930s, again with no accompanying rise in obesity rates. [Data from USDA ERS]

The idea that "pizza, chips, and soda" are the main drivers of the rise in obesity raises the question: Why in 1980 did these things become so much more compelling to consumers?" It's not like those things weren't heavily marketed at us & widely available in the 60s & 70s

The fact that they were & obesity rates were *creeping up* was one of the reasons the DGA were created.

But prior to 1980, we were also encouraged to have protein (meat) at nearly every meal.

"Appetite control? More protein!"

But protein foods - "a hard-boiled egg or chicken leg or cheese or luncheon meat" - also came with scary sat fat/cholesterol, so these foods were discouraged in favor of fat-free Pop-Tarts, etc.

If we lack necessary protein & we are hungrier sooner, we keep eating (foods that are cheap, tasty, & convenient) until our needs are met. So now the "pizza, soda, chips" theory makes a little more sense, but it has to be seen in a larger context.

Bottom line: We were told to stop eating perfectly nutritious & nutritionally dense foods & told to eat nutritionally weaker foods that fulfilled no essential requirements. That this advice drove consumption should surprise no one.