[fogarty]

The bottom line is the food pyramid is IRRELEVANT. It doesn't matter whether it is upside down or not. The primary factor is exercise. A hundred fifty years ago, people were eating far less beef, chicken, and pork then they are now. In fact, they were eating a lot more carbos back then - simply because it was more difficult to store and obtain meat for the average family. Yet back then there was no epidemic of obesity as we see know.

The one overarching factor which can be seen is the lack of physical activity. Occam's razor would seem to indicate that the sedentary lifestyle is what leads to obesity, not necessarily what you eat. Clearly there are isolated medical cases which are out of scope here.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The hard work and exercise point is quite valid. Overeating of anything will cause obesity.

However, the carbs people ingest today are really little more than varieties of sugar, disguised as something else. Eating these processed carbos(sugar) causes the hormones to become unbalanced, irritates the stomache and makes people feel unsated. Therefore they eat more because their bodies don't believe they have eaten sufficiently. It's a viscious circle.

Combine this with inactivity and you have disaster.

But the fat free, low protein diet is in itself dangerous and unhealthy. Ever notice that people diagnosed as high cholesteral never improve on the low fat diets?
They almost always end up on medicine. (Chemical additives to counteract the chemical additives in their food.(Sugar)

[dyed_in_the_wool]

You're right on the sedentary lifestyle. Without movement or activity, you won't lose an ounce.
The other thing is processing. How many steps are between you and the food source? What happens in those steps?
Like it or not, that gram or two of fiber in whole grain bread is important. It's not the white bread is a culprit because it's a 'carb', it's a culprit because it doesn't provide nutrition. (I know this isn't your point, but bear with me.)
But this still gets back to the requirement of a balance between nutrition and exercise. If you eat more than you burn, you gain weight (regardless of what you eat.) If you have a negative caloric intake, you lose weight.
I'm dealing with this right now. And it sucks. But I've lost 10 pounds in almost two weeks.
Just whole grains, fruits, vegetables, light dairy and occasional fats.
Oh, and I'm rowing my butt off every morning.

[muggs]

The one overarching factor which can be seen is the lack of physical activity. Occam's razor would seem to indicate that the sedentary lifestyle is what leads to obesity, not necessarily what you eat. Clearly there are isolated medical cases which are out of scope here.

BUMP!

[strider44]

"The bottom line is the food pyramid is IRRELEVANT. It doesn't matter whether it is upside down or not. The primary factor is exercise. A hundred fifty years ago, people were eating far less beef, chicken, and pork then they are now. In fact, they were eating a lot more carbos back then - simply because it was more difficult to store and obtain meat for the average family. Yet back then there was no epidemic of obesity as we see know."

Back then most people also died well before their 50th birthday too. Disease, poor hygiene, lack of medical expertise, you name it. People didn't live long enough for cholesterol to give them a heart attack. All the exercise they got through manual labor was irrelevant too.