what's your diet of choice?

in my office, i have 5 coworkers: one man and 4 other women besides me. at least three of the women in my office are on a low-carb diet. since i've never ranted about this subject, and it now confronts me more times every day than it has previously, and since i can't rant about it to the women at work, my blog is the place to do it.

my thing is, i hate diets. i think they're stupid. people (myself first) need to learn to eat healthy food, limit portions and exercise, not buy into some crazy scheme to cut out certain food groups.

being greek, i'm first going to stress this: MODERATION. greeks came up with the phrase "everything in moderation" and they had it right. don't be a jackass and quit eating bread. just don't eat it all day long. that goes for everything else.
i'm not a doctor. i've also never been on a real diet, so i'm really not an expert by any means, but i do have a few arguments to present to fans of these crazy diets:

- the atkins diet, as i understand it, suggests that it doesn't matter if you eat lots of fats, as long as you do not eat carbohydrates. however, modern medicine has been telling us for quite some time now that people who have high fat diets are far more prone to get cancer than other people. so choose: do you want to be fat, or have cancer? i'm think i favor chubby to cancerous, even though as i will explain soon, i do not believe that cutting carbohydrates and loading up on fat and protein is the answer.

-missy once told me that cats get renal failure from a diet that is too high in protein. if a diet that is too high in protein can be disastrous for cats; animals that are almost solely carnivorous, what will it do to omnivorous humans?

my best argument is this:
the human race has used carbohydrates as it's sole means of survival for thousands of years. eating carbohydrates has kept us alive and not fat. most of the world's cultures have diets that include plenty of carbohydrates. obesity has only been an epidemic for the last 60 years, and far more in america than in other countries. are we eating more carbs in the last sixty years than humanity has for many millenia? no? are we eating more carbs than the french? remember, they're the ones who for breakfast eat large butter soaked flaky bread crescents. depending on what website you click on, you might find that the french have an obesity rate of about 10% while americans have an obesity rate of closer to 57%. i could be wrong there, i didn't research extensively. but if we assume the numbers are somewhere close to correct, do we somehow think that the french eat fewer carbs than in the u.s.? before you answer, remember that the word "biscuit" shares part of it's origin in the french language and there's a type of bread named after the nation. how about those great cheeses the french are famous for? do we think they somehow eat a lower fat diet? hmmm.

i think i've proven to myself at least that eating carbohydrates is by no means the cause of obesity in america, or anywhere else. sure, i had two greek aunts who sat around their houses all day eating loaves of bread, and they were as wide as they were tall, but i think it had to do with more than just the bread, although the bread didn't help.

so here's my closing question: what is different about the way americans live now than the way we lived 60 years ago? i know there are crazies out there that will use that to come up with some diet involving plucking chickens, but my guess is that our lifestyles have changed in two major ways. 1. we started driving as a main means of transportation, and then we started building cities based on the notion that everyone was using cars, and then we couldn't stop using cars because everything was so far away. it's a vicious cycle that has led to people being very inactive. 2. we eat mainly processed foods now. it has to have negative effects on our health. if you look at the design of kitchens from even 40 years ago, like my house in chesapeake, they had almost no cabinet space because in the sixties, people didn't go on massive once a month grocery shopping trips. they went several times a week and bought fresh food which was probably much healthier for them than all the canned, boxed and frozen food we eat now. plus, i bet people didn't eat out quite as much as nathan and i do.
being healthy is a combination of proper diet and exercise. if you build a lifestyle that is impractical and unhealthy, you will be unhealthy as a nation. our kids are fat because we drive their fat little asses to school, home, and everywhere in between and they have to sit and be good and quiet in all those places. they're inactive little slobs, because we make them be that way. why do kids need to ride in the car to school? they should walk or ride their bikes. schools don't even have bike racks anymore. but, oh yeah, we have to drive them because between the house and the school, we built cul-de-sacs, highways and parking lots (which will be the subject of an upcoming post), making it impossible for the little monsters to go anywhere their parents didn't take them in the escalade.
my solution? i can either 1. move to the northeast or out of the country, or 2. i can strive for change at home. i'm going to go with plan 2. if i can't find an effective way to work for change, i'll see you guys in belgium. where they have lots of chocolate for me, beer for nathan, and a much lower fat-ass rate.
speaking of american fat-asses makes me want to start a soap company.
i hope this has made up for my lackluster posting lately.
by the way, tomorrow, sean will show up late at night, but earlier in the day, flint will come down here with his girlfriend, and we will spend the day together. in the evening, we will go see what i think is my 4th flogging molly concert.