Oh, the irony! Right? Not really. Carbohydrates in particular have been sold as the top staple of a good diet (bread/pasta/etc. was at the top of the old food pyramid after all) by commercial interests for almost a century. Fats were of course villified for a good while. Why? Probably because it is easier to gorge yourself on carbo-heavy foods and drinks than on other types of food (also less processed foods). Thus you can sell more of it.

(You can also salten soft drinks a bit in order to induce more thirst… since all you have to do to hide that salty flavor is to add more sugar.)

We live in a consumer society now, where apparent “abundance” gets turned into new ailments and problems in order to sell more stuff (not necessarily more food—could be exercise equipment or whatever else).

And it’s of course no coincidence that wealthier people have more and better access to whole foods and other supposed “lifestyle choices”.

There’s nothing ironic here at all. Just new problems being invented in order to sell more stuff.

> wealthier people have more and better access to whole foods and other supposed “lifestyle choices”.

This is one of the secret priviliged pleasures in my life - having zero income yet eating whole foods like some rich person. The sheer social altruism of nordic countries is nothing short of amazing.

But it's really cold here in winter. If we didn't take care of each other, those left starving and homeless would revolt violently, refusing to freeze and die (or die then freeze).

Please elaborate how you eat like a rich person while having zero income. Are you growing your own produce?

Social security simply affords me an amount of money that's plenty to buy whatever organic and whole foods I desire. It's probably budgeted for neurotypicals to go drinking at bars, buy new clothes, stuff like that. I'm happy spending it all on good food.

Hmm. I thought that meat was always on the prized top. A steak, for instance, or at least some good poultry.

Bread used to be very much the base, so basic that it ended up being mentioned in the daily prayer.

I meant top as in “eat a lot (most) of this”. Meat/poultry was further down.

I thought we had reached a "Meat Considered Harmful" stage due to climate change.

All the carbon management an effort to boost Beyond Burger sales?

In any case, I'll die a carnivore.

Meat like all things has its scale. Some meats are of course better for you than others. Steak is probably way better for you to eat than ground beef or hot dogs. Chicken probably better than most beef products.

An unfortunate reality I had to break to my sister in law, Beyond Burgers are not all that "healthy" and they never marketed it as such. People, such as bloggers, media, and friends on facbeook/twitter, jumped to the conclusion it was.

I won't say that it applies to all meat, but mostly to beef.

Also, beef need not vanish, it could just go expensive, like, say, foie gras.

I personally am totally fine with chicken, fish, and shrimp providing the bulk of animal protein in my diet, and relegating a steak to rare festive occasions, as it was historically.

> Fats were of course villified for a good while. Why?

Around the 90ies the "fats are bad" narrative was mostly a marketing ploy from the sugar industry.

Surplus of all macronutrients - fat and protein, too. Mostly lacking in micronutrients - vitamins and minerals

Is it structurally lacking or just culturally? You can get a bunch of kale for $2 in most grocery stores. Garlic, beans, turmeric, none of these are particularly expensive or hard to find.

Both. In few countries the industry managed to convince people that healthy food, especially vegetables, should be more expensive.

Secondly, in some countries there are food deserts or a small selection of healthy food among a lot of unhealthy one (e.g. stuffed with oil, sugar, fats etc)

Finally, the ratio of carbohydrate-to-vitamins is increasing in many foods due to artificial selection and increased CO2 in the atmosphere.