Skip to main content

Were Americans Ever Truly Healthy? New Research Challenges Nutrition Nostalgia

5 min read
1,086 words
Share:

A new wave of scholarship is challenging the common belief that America had a golden age of health—a notion recently revived by public figures such as the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, who has made headlines with the “Make America Healthy Again” campaign. This movement assumes that Americans were once notably healthier, but an in-depth look at historical records and leading expert analysis reveals a more complex—and less nostalgic—story (Bloomberg; New York Times).

The idea of a once-healthier, more robust America is alluring, especially amid contemporary anxieties about chronic disease, ultra-processed foods, and public health divides. Some political movements have leveraged such nostalgia, suggesting that earlier dietary habits—like those before the age of industrial food—were better for the nation’s health. However, rigorous historical research demonstrates that previous eras were rife with their own nutrition problems. In the early 20th century, doctors commonly advised three hearty, meat-heavy meals daily, while influencers of the time, such as early vegetarians and fitness enthusiasts, argued for lighter or plant-based fare. Even so, the population faced ongoing threats from malnutrition, overnutrition, infectious diseases, and a lack of effective medical treatments.

Why does this narrative matter? The “Make America Healthy Again” slogan presumes a mythic past when the American diet, environment, and public health were optimal—an idea that oversimplifies history. As historians including those from Stony Brook University and Yale point out, Americans have always contended with health disparities and suboptimal nutrition. During the 19th century and into the early 20th, Americans endured high rates of alcohol consumption, minimal access to fresh produce, and frequent malnutrition. Until the 1930s, most Americans ate repetitive diets based on dried foods, and access to fresh fruits and vegetables was limited by transportation and seasonal constraints.

The health consequences were serious: historical data from the medical records of Union Army soldiers, analyzed by leading economic historians, show rates of chronic conditions—such as untreated hernias and heart valve problems—that were well above those of today. For instance, 19% of these veterans had significant heart valve disease by age 60, compared to only 8.5% of adults today. Life expectancy was sharply lower. In 1850, a 20-year-old male could expect to live just to about 61—many years less than today’s average.

Public health started to improve in the 20th century thanks to cleaner water, vaccination campaigns, and greater nutrition science awareness. Yet, the early to mid-1900s were not a time of optimal health. The 1918 flu pandemic, which killed over 675,000 Americans, struck when doctors had little understanding of viruses and few ways to protect the population. Alcohol and tobacco were ubiquitous, and the public faced large burdens from infectious diseases and soon, from emerging chronic diseases.

The 1950s and 60s are often remembered as prosperous decades—a period when “modern” American health supposedly peaked. But the facts tell a different story. Despite the development of antibiotics, vaccines, and new medicines, rates of heart attacks and strokes soared. By 1960, heart disease accounted for around one-third of all American deaths, driven in part by staggeringly high smoking rates. As a renowned sociologist from the University of Pennsylvania notes, smoking was so normalized that social pressure led virtually everyone, from doctors to college students, to adopt the habit. In the words of one Yale medical historian, “It was my duty to find my brand." Cancer, too, was largely untreatable before the advance of modern therapies.

Improvements in health have accelerated only in recent decades—thanks to reductions in smoking, more advanced medical care, cholesterol-lowering medications, and targeted cancer therapies. For example, heart disease mortality in the US has halved since 1950, with smoking rates now far below historical levels. But these improvements have been uneven; significant disparities persist in access to care, diet quality, and health outcomes, especially across income and racial groups (New York Times).

Contemporary experts caution against romanticizing any previous era. As a historian at Johns Hopkins University aptly put it, Americans have a “long history of nostalgia for a past that was better than the present," yet the evidence does not support the claim that Americans used to be healthier as a whole. Academic work highlights that real public health progress has come from coordinated improvements in medicine, sanitation, food security, and lifestyle education—developments that accrued gradually and unevenly over more than a century.

For Thailand, these findings offer timely lessons. As the kingdom undergoes its own rapid “nutrition transition”—shifting from traditional diets to more processed and energy-dense foods—public health leaders are grappling with many of the same dynamics once faced by the US (PMC). Thailand has succeeded in reducing childhood undernutrition, yet now faces double-burden malnutrition: rising rates of obesity and diabetes coexisting with pockets of undernutrition. Recent research shows that since the 1980s, sugar consumption among Thais has tripled, obesity rates have soared (with up to 40% of adult women overweight by 2010), and socio-economic disparities in nutrition continue to widen (PubMed). Urbanization and the expansion of supermarkets have made globalized diets both affordable and accessible, but also threaten traditional dietary patterns.

Thai public health officials and academic researchers stress that the American experience contains warnings as well as inspiration. Rapid transitions in diet, if not well managed, can generate decades of health problems related to overnutrition and non-communicable diseases. The lesson isn’t to return to the diets of the early 20th century—when infectious disease and malnutrition were prevalent—but to draw on current advances in nutrition science, education, and policy to shape a future where healthy food is available and affordable for all Thais. Retaining the strengths of the traditional Thai diet—rich in fresh vegetables, rice, lean proteins, and modest use of added sugar—while embracing medical and scientific progress is key. Policy actions could include nutrition education, food labeling regulations, support for traditional fresh markets, and targeted subsidies for healthy food among low-income populations.

The myth of a healthful, idyllic past persists in many societies, but the data shows that real progress comes from confronting present-day problems with evidence-based interventions. For readers in Thailand, the pragmatic conclusion is to be wary of calls to “return” to a golden age of health—whether from politicians or cultural influencers. Instead, focus on supporting ongoing nutrition transitions with strong public policy, reliable health information, and community engagement. Maintaining a critical perspective, investing in public health infrastructure, and learning from global best practices are the most reliable ways forward.

For further reading, see the original analysis in Bloomberg, the historical data summarised in the New York Times, and the Thai perspective detailed in journals such as PMC and PubMed.

Related Articles

6 min read

Groundbreaking Study Reveals Diet, Not Inactivity, Drives Modern Obesity Crisis

news exercise

A landmark international study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) is turning conventional wisdom about obesity on its head, revealing that a sedentary lifestyle in wealthy nations may not be the main culprit behind soaring obesity rates. Instead, the research finds that diets high in ultra-processed foods are the leading driver of the modern obesity epidemic, with important lessons for the Thai population and global public health campaigns alike (Washington Post).

#obesity #diet #exercise +8 more
6 min read

New Study Highlights Twice-Weekly Fasting as the Superior Diet for Managing Type 2 Diabetes

news nutrition

A groundbreaking new clinical trial has pinpointed a twice-weekly intermittent fasting regimen, commonly called the “5:2 diet,” as the most effective and sustainable strategy among three popular diets for improving blood sugar control in people with type 2 diabetes and obesity. The findings, presented at the ENDO 2025 conference in San Francisco, not only illuminate a promising approach for diabetes management but also have significant implications for Thailand, where diabetes rates are rising and dietary trends are keenly watched by both the medical community and the public.

#diabetes #intermittentfasting #diet +5 more
5 min read

Alternate-Day Fasting Shown to Outperform Intermittent Fasting in Metabolic Health, But Weight Loss Margins Remain Modest

news nutrition

A new global analysis suggests alternate-day fasting may offer slightly greater benefits for weight and cholesterol management than intermittent fasting, according to evidence from nearly 100 clinical trials. As interest in dietary strategies grows in Thailand, especially amidst rising rates of metabolic syndrome and obesity, this research highlights fresh possibilities—and caveats—for Thai readers considering alternative nutritional approaches.

With 2.5 billion adults worldwide classed as overweight and more than 890 million living with obesity according to the World Health Organization (who.int), weight management is an increasingly urgent public health issue. Thailand is not exempt, with national surveys showing the prevalence of overweight and obesity rising steadily in recent years (healthdata.org). These trends are tightly linked to escalating rates of high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease, deeply affecting Thai families and healthcare systems alike.

#health #Thailand #fasting +8 more

Medical Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered medical advice. Always consult with qualified healthcare professionals before making decisions about your health.