Fat land : how Americans became the fattest people in the world Read online

  This book made available by the Internet Archive.

  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

  This book would not have been possible without the knowledge, wisdom, and generosity of many dedicated individuals, chief among whom were Colin Harrison, my editor at Harper's, and Deanne Urmy, my editor at Houghton Mifflin. It was Colin Harrison who first prodded me to write seriously about the subject of obesity, and who held me accountable to the highest standards of journalism in the process. Likewise did Deanne Urmy help me to see the worth in a book-length treatment of the subject. I am also indebted to her for her wit, insight, and passion, which made the path to publication a pleasurable one.

  In the process of reporting the many-sided aspects of obesity, I was mentored by two of the best in their respective fields. Professor James O. Hill, of the University of Colorado, was a gentle but tough-minded Virgil in the purgatory of modern epidemiological statistics. Dr. Francine Ratner Kaufman, chief of endocrinology at Children's Hospital Los Angeles and president of the American Diabetes Association, helped me see the real-world implications of obesity statistics and showed me that something can be done about it if one is energetic, compassionate, and tenacious enough. Fortunately for the children of Los Angeles, she is.

  A number of other medical and health specialists, all noted in the introductory remarks for each chapter in this book's notes, were of enormous help. A few deserve special recognition. John Peters, Ph.D., of Procter & Gamble's Nutrition Science Institute, provided enlightened and probing comments on the nature of consumerism, consumption, and obesity. Betty Hennessy, of the Los Angeles Office of Education, was a font of information and contacts in the world of physical education. Ash Hayes, the former director of the President's Council on Physical Fitness and

  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

  Sports, and Charles Corbin, professor of exercise physiology at the University of Arizona, gave freely of their time answering my many inquiries on the subject of fitness testing. The staff of the USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion was critical in obtaining much-needed documents and reports, as was the staff of the National Archives in College Park, Maryland. Finding many obscure journal articles would have been impossible without the reference desk at the Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library at the University of California, Los Angeles. Personal access to scholars was greatly aided by Dunn Gifford and Sara Baer-Sinnott, of Oldways Preservation Trust.

  Along the way, a number of friends, teachers, fellow journalists, authors, and editors have also given invaluable support, advice, and criticism. Among them are Joyce Appleby, Michael Baiter, Dr. Scott Connelly, Daniel Fineman, Ted Fishman, Eva Fleming, Norris Hundley, Joel Kot-kin, Lewis Lapham, Robert Lerner, Stephanie Mencimer, Jeremy Newman, Steve Oney, Richard Rodriguez, Barbara J. Rolls, Mark Salzman, Barry Sanders, Catherine Seipp, Jim Stillwell, and Jessica Yu. Sue Horton published my first personal account of weight loss while an editor at the LA Weekly, then made room for several columns on the subject at the Los Angeles Times, where she edits the Sunday Opinion section. Dan Ferrara, my editor at Worth, carved out space for a remarkable ten thousand-word essay on the subject at that magazine. Glenn Nishimura, my editor at USA Today, was a crucial advocate for several op-ed pieces that appeared in those pages.

  Special gratitude goes to my agent, Kris Dahl at ICM, for her agile representation, for her cool-headedness, and for always returning my calls.

  My family, both nuclear and extended, deserve the lion's share of credit for their unflagging support of my writing career in general, and this book in particular. My mother, Betty Critser, kept me upbeat when things looked dim, as did my sisters, Barbara and Linda, and I am lucky to have inherited the work ethic of my late father, Paul C. Critser. My culinary mentor and mother-in-law, Julia Mongelli, kept me rooted to reality in matters of food and food politics. Nicholas and Christopher Coauette and Elliott Haberman likewise provided a reality check on what children really want to eat (which is, from what I can gather, candy . . . now!). A huge thanks — and grazie!— goes as well to the Spence, Stromei, Caiolfi, Lanaghan, Ra-guseo, and Macchia families.

  This book is dedicated to my wife, Antoinette Mongelli, who was a constant source of inspiration, support, good will, insight, humor, joy, and love. Without her, Fat Land would still be between my ears.

  vn

  INTRODUCTION

  Obesity is the dominant unmet global health issue, with Western countries topping the list.

  — World Health Organization

  Set the soul of thy son aright, and all the rest will be added hereafter!

  — Saint John Chrysostom

  This book is not a memoir, but it is undeniably grounded in a singular personal experience. My experience was not, for those hoping for something juicy, a moment of childhood drama. Nor was it anything that led to any form of spiritual or true psychological revelation. Compared to the harrowing tribulations that so much of the world's population endures, it was, when all is said and done, rather mundane and petty. Here it is: Some guy called me fatso. Specifically, he screamed: "Watch it, fatso!"

  Here I should note that I deserved the abuse; after all, I had opened my car door into a busy street without looking into my side mirror first, and so had nearly decapitated the poor fellow. I could have killed him. But why . . .fatso? Could it be because I was indeed forty pounds overweight? Or that I could not fit into

  FAT LAND

  any of my clothes, even the ones I got at the Gap that were labeled "relaxed" (which, come to think of it, I wasn't), let alone the ones considered "baggy" (which, again come to think of it, I was)? Could it be because I had to back up ten feet so as to get my entire face into the bathroom mirror to shave every morning? Or that when I dined with friends they hid their small pets and seemed to guard their plates, one arm curled around them, as if I might plunge my fork into their juicy pieces of duck and make off with them? I'm obviously joking about the latter, but the point is that the insult hit home. In upwardly mobile, professional America, being fat — and having someone actually notice it and say something about it — is almost as bad as getting caught reading Playboy in your parents' bedroom when you're ten. Shame shame shame.

  Fatness was hardly a new issue for me. My wife and my physician had been after me for some time to do something about my problem, the former quite gingerly, the latter not so. My doctor, in fact, had recently suggested that I consider a new weight loss medication. At the time, I had promptly brushed the idea aside. Now, the sting still fresh, I reconsidered: Why not?

  And so, for the next nine months, I put all of my extra energy into the task of shedding my excess avoirdupois. In modern America, this, I would find, was a rite in itself, replete with its own social institutions (health clubs), tonics (Meridia), taboos (Krispy Kreme), and aspirational totems (Levi's 501 regular cuts). I was apparently ready for this rite, for, to my delight, I slowly but surely lost the weight. What followed was encouraging, if somewhat predictable: congratulations from friends for "sticking to it"; enhanced self-esteem; a new wardrobe; a newfound confidence and spring in my step; phone calls from J.Lo. and Julia.

  Yet the more I contemplated my success, the more I came to see it not as a triumph of will, but as a triumph of my economic and social class. The weight loss medication Meridia, for example, had been effective not because it is such a good drug; even its

  INTRODUCTION

  purveyors freely admit it is far from effective for most people. What had made the drug work for me was the upper-middle-class support system that I had brought to it: a good physician who insisted on seeing me every two weeks, access to a safe park where I would walk and jog, friends who shared the value of becoming slender, healthy home-cooked food consumed with my wife, books about health, and medical journals about the latest nutritional breakthroughs. And money. And time.

  I wrote about these insights, first for a local magazine, then in my column in USA Today, where I write about the politics of health. I then moved on to other topics. As is the case with most subject matter, fatness had remained, at least for me, somewhat abstract, distant — intellectual rather than emotional. It was certainly nothing one could view as a matter of national urgency.

  Then, two things happened which would change that.

  For one, I met a man named James O. Hill. Hill is a physiologist at the University of Colorado's Health Sciences Center. Curly-haired, a bit provocative, Hill is a vigorous, intellectually engaged fellow with an agile debating style and a wide-ranging presence in his field. Hill's field is the study of obesity, everything from its epidemiology to its causes to its treatment. It was Hill who, only a few years ago, coined what may be the single most quoted line in regard to today's soaring obesity rates. "If obesity is left unchecked," he told the Associated Press, "almost all Americans will be overweight by 2050." Becoming obese, he went on, "is a normal response to the American environment." With a presence on all of the leading public health committees charged with doing something about the nation's expanding waistline, Hill is the dean of obesity studies. It was my fortune to meet him at just the right time.

  Hill spelled out the problem more clearly than anyone else. "See, for decades, most of us believed that the rate of overweight in this country was relatively static — somewhere around 25 percent of the population would be always overweight," he recalled one day. "But then, beginning in the late eighties, we started
see-

  FAT LAND

  ing that rate spike upward, 30, 35, 40 percent. And that started freaking a lot of us out. Where were the gains coming from? We know that obesity has a strong genetic component, but twenty years — anyone knows that is a laughingly small amount of time for genetics to change so much. So for the guys like myself, the question has become, basically, what has changed in the environment to allow the inclination toward overweight and obesity to express itself? What changed around us to allow us to get so big?"

  Big, of course, is putting it mildly. Today Americans are the fattest people on the face of the earth (save for the inhabitants of a few South Seas islands). About 61 percent of Americans are overweight — overweight enough to begin experiencing health problems as a direct result of that weight. About 20 percent of us are obese — so fat that our lives will likely be cut short by excess fat. More than 5 million Americans now meet the definition of morbid obesity; they are so obese that they qualify for a radical surgical technique known as gastroplasty, wherein the stomach is surgically altered so as to keep food from being digested. (The American Bariatric Society, whose members perform gastroplasty, reports that its waiting lists are months long and that its surgeons "can't keep up.")

  Children are most at risk from obesity. About 25 percent of all Americans under age nineteen are overweight or obese, a figure that, Hill points out, has doubled in thirty years. That one figure recently moved U.S. Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher to declare obesity to be a national epidemic. "Today," he told a group of federal bureaucrats and health policy officers, "we see a nation of young people seriously at risk of starting out obese and dooming themselves to the difficult task of overcoming a tough illness."

  Obesity itself is slowly moving into the middle and upper classes, but the condition disproportionately plagues the poor and the working poor. Mexican American women aged 20 to 74, for example, have an obesity rate about 13 percent higher for those

  INTRODUCTION

  living below the poverty line versus those above the poverty line. Diabetes occurs at a rate of 16 to 26 percent in both Hispanic and black Americans aged 45 to 74, compared to 12 percent in non-Hispanic whites of the same age.

  Yet most of America — particularly the America of the Me Generation — seems to be in deep denial about the class and age aspects of obesity. Get a group of boomers together and, within minutes, the topic of obesity shifts not to medical issues but, rather, to aesthetic and gender issues, to the notion — widely held in the urban upper middle class — that "talking too much about obesity just ends up making kids have low self-esteem." Or that it "might lead to anorexia."

  Those attitudes also permeate the medical sphere; doctors and other health care providers remain either in ignorance or outright denial about the health danger to the poor and the young. In a rare moment of industry scrutiny a few years ago, the Centers for Disease Control surveyed twelve thousand obese adults to find out what, exactly, their doctors were telling them. The results were arresting. Fewer than half reported being advised to lose weight. A separate study sharpened the indictment: Patients with incomes above $50,000 were more likely to receive such advice than were those with incomes below. As the Journal of the American Medical Association noted, "The lower rates of counseling among respondents with lower education and income levels . . . are particularly worrisome, because members of lower socioeconomic groups have poorer health outcomes."

  Yes, worrisome. Yet we Americans are inured to such dirges, which daily seem to well up from the pages of our newspapers. Certainly I was. Until, that is, the unexpected intruded.

  It happened in the Intensive Care Unit of Los Angeles County/ USC Medical Center, one of the nation's busiest hospitals. I was there visiting an ailing relative when, suddenly, a gaggle of interns, nurses, and orderlies pushed a gurney through the ward. On it lay a very large young man, perhaps 450 pounds, hooked to the ganglia of modern medicine. He had just undergone an emer-

  FAT LAND

  gency gastroplasty repair, and it did not look good. As I came to learn, first through bits and pieces exchanged by the ward nurses, then through comments by the patient's parents, it was not the first emergency for this man. As his mother, a modestly dressed woman in her forties, moaned at one point, "Second time in three months ... his stomach keeps coming unstapled" (not all forms of gastroplasty actually involve stapling, as did older forms of obesity surgery, but many still refer to it that way). The woman then leaned on the shoulder of her weary husband. "My ... boy." Her boy was dying from his own fat.

  Yes, he was dying, and yes, the more I looked, the more I could see: Here was someone's boy, one plagued, I imagined, by years of bad health, discomfort, self-loathing, and, of course, countless insults and snickers by passersby and friends alike. But someone's little boy nonetheless. Watching him as he gasped for air — respiratory function is one of the first things that can go when one gets so big — I could not help think: There but for the grace of God go I. And, to hear Jim Hill and Dr. Satcher tell it, a large number of other decent Americans.

  Driving home that night, through the barrio of East L.A., then up the chilly black Pasadena Freeway to the town where I live, I wondered just how a boy becomes so disabled. Genes certainly played a role, but as Jim Hill had lucidly pointed out, genes have always played a role in obesity. The question was, why are we seeing so many more people like the one I just saw? How — exactly — had they been made? And if it is true that, in America, every man is his own author, that every man, as Ivan Illich once wrote, "is responsible for what has been made of him," then what, as a nation, is being made of us by the obese?

  I decided to find out: How is it that we better-off Americans, perhaps the most health-conscious of any generation in the history of the world, have come to preside over the deadly fattening of our youth and their future? That is the story you will read on the following pages, and that is why we must now turn to the strange career of one Earl L. Butz . ..

  UP UP UP!

  (Or, Where the Calories Came From)

  Earl butz, nominated by Richard Nixon in 1971 to be the eighteenth secretary of agriculture, conjured the airs of a courtly midwestern grandfather, the kind who liked to show up at Sunday dinner, give the blessing, lecture the grandchildren about patriotism, free trade, the goodness of farm life, and the evils that threatened such a life — and then go out to the backyard and tell off-color jokes to the assembled adults.

  In Washington, Butz was an optimist, chanting "Up up up!" whenever he got good news about farm prices. And he was telegenic, his hawk-nosed profile and slicked-back white hair a staple on the nightly news, where he would spin his own "up up up" version of America and its endless agricultural cornucopia. Indeed, if most Nixon appointees avoided the light and the heat, Butz bathed in it. There were his endless battles with Henry Kissinger, whom Butz liked to accuse of "putting your dirty fingers into my farm policy." There was his constant — and very public — denigration of welfare spending, of people who "sit on their duff waiting for a nice handout." And there was his persona in his office, where Butz would regale visitors with his grand visions for agriculture — better crops! tastier tomatoes! corn and

  FAT LAND

  wheat and rice to feed a hungry world! — and then, grinning like a Rockwellian Puck, jerk his thumb backward at the sculpture sitting behind his desk — one of two wooden elephants, copulating. "That's what it was like trying to multiply the farm vote for Nixon!" he'd say with an infectious belly laugh. It was hard not to conclude that Earl "Rusty" Butz was, among many other things, a true piece of work.

  Like most presidents, Richard Nixon had nominated his new agriculture secretary for largely political reasons. By the early 1970s the once solid "farm vote" was wobbling. The problem was the economy; farm income had plummeted. The immediate causes were short term in nature. Cautious growers simply had not planted enough grain crops. At the same time, the costs of farming — from agrochemicals to labor to transportation — had soared, so much so that by 1972 poultry farmers were forced to kill a million baby chicks because they could not afford the price of feed. Urbanization drove the long-term forces behind the farm problem. Cropland was getting more and more expensive to hold on to. So was labor. Old-timers were seeing their grandchildren go off to college — and not return. Anyone with political antennae could see that the overall mood was one of gloom — not a particularly promising mood for what many believed would be a hotly contested election. When profits hit an all-time low in 1971, farm leaders began openly talking about defecting to the Democrats. Nixon, preoccupied with the Vietnam War and dogged by the press, despaired: A bunch of angry farmers was all he needed.