New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Sizing Up

Roots of obesity epidemic lie in the mid-20th Century

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Beginning in the 1980s, the average weight of Americans began to soar, and by 2002, 31 percent were classified as obese. Although the reasons for this epidemic remain controversial, researchers have implicated at least four developments: The first is the decrease in energy expenditure throughout the 20th century, following the introduction of automobiles and the replacement of high-energy blue-collar work by low-energy office occupations. The second is the growing affluence of Americans, who could now afford more and better food. The third is the technological transformation of the food industry in the past 30 years that has made available cheap, convenient, high-calorie and tasty foods. The last is the decline through much of the 20th century in extended breast-feeding, which tends to reduce an infant's chances of obesity in later life.

As a consequence of these shifts, the average weight of Americans increased throughout the century. But because many were underweight in the earlier years, the epidemic of obesity did not become apparent until the 1980s, when these historical developments apparently reached critical mass.Dietary fat has not played a major role in the epidemic. Although clinical trials have shown that reducing dietary fat leads to weight reduction, the average amount consumed has declined in recent decades. Heavy television viewing by children is linked to obesity, yet there is no definitive proof of a causal relation. The decline in smoking and the popularity of eating out--restaurants typically serve extra-large portions--have also been blamed, but the evidence remains contradictory.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe