Did your ancestors recently experience food insecurities?

AdahPotatah2024

springlering62 wrote: »

OT but when we went to a “reunion” (aka a clan gathering)of our family name at the family castle in Scotland, we learned that many of our (husband’s) name ended up in Oklahoma, because of the Trail of Tears. They chose to go rather than abandon their families.

.

Interesting! I read that Cherokee Nation sent money to Ireland to help during the famine. A lot of people don't realize that Cherokee were really divided in the 1800s. There were the traditional, full bloods and then the mixed bloods, Christian and missionary families who were the ones,for the most part, dealing with govt. and running taverns and ferries, etc.

morenin

I have historical food insecurity (food stamps, food banks, and a garden were the only sources of food during most of my childhood on welfare), fourth generation of that on my mother's side (the previous three generations just didn't get paid enough for their work). I'm finally learning to climb out of food hoarding, now I'm trying not to cringe at the prices of non-processed foods, as I relearn my eating habits.

My mother's family also didn't come over to the US until AFTER the Potato Famine was over. Every woman on mom's side of the family (including me) has hypothyroid. I don't think that's a coincidence, as hypothyroid means you burn through calories more slowly. Possible evidence left over from the ancestors who survived the Great Hunger.

paperpudding

yirara wrote: »

To be honest, I do wonder whether there's anyone here whose ancestors didn't experience food insecurity in the last 300 years. Two world wars with a big influence on the local population in Europe, various civil wars, famines, industrialization was harsh on working families, not free farm workers also didn't have limitless food. .

Exactly

Going back over the last 300 years, almost nobody anywhere i n the world would have no ancestors who experienced food insecurity.
Perhaps people whose ancestors were exclusively royal or super wealthy of whatever country - but that is almost nobody.

it was more or less the norm for everyone all the time, food has not been plentiful for most of the population anywhere until relatively recently - with extremes added in - world wars, civil wars ,revolutions, economic collapse, displacement of refugees etc - depending which part/s of the world your ancestors lived in.

I am a white person of UK origin, living i n Australia. My ancestors i n Australia lived through World Wars and post war shortages (as did everyone)
Prior to that I had ancestors immigrating from Cornwall - as did many people in South Australia. They did so after economic collapse of mining in Cornwall.
Although I did not know them, common sense says they would not have been wealthy or in abundance of food to do that.

AdahPotatah2024

I'm looking up the major famines over the last 200-300 years or so. I bet we do see the future generations affected worse than others in general. I agree that everyone experienced food insecurities certain times of the year for most of human history especially before agricultural societies and food preservation techniques.

AdahPotatah2024

The following information is provided by the U.S. Census Bureau and covers the time period between 2000 and 2020, and sheds light on the U.S. population by ancestry.
2000 Results
Rank Ancestry group Population
1 German 42,841,569(Germany experienced famine 1914-1919 and 46-47and around 23.08% Germans obese)
2 Irish 30,524,799 (Ireland last famine was 1924-25 and 1879, but far less mortality than famine 1845-49 and now 30.70% obesity)
3 Black/African-American1 (non-Hispanic) 24,903,412 ( A lot of recent famine but obesity in Africa very low)
4 English 24,509,692 ( UK last famine ? Europe 1816 Obesity now 26.94%)
5 American1 20,188,305 (US obesity 41.64%)
6 Mexican 18,382,291? Mayan famine?
7 Italian 15,638,348 (Last famine 1801? and obesity today 17.97%)
8 Polish 8,977,235 ?
9 French 8,309,666 (France last famine 1788? and now 10.18% obesity)
10 American Indian1 7,876,568 ?
11 Scottish 4,890,581(last famine 1845-57? and today 26.94%)
12 Dutch 4,541,770 (The last Dutch famine -1944–1945 and In 2023, 16% of people in the Netherlands aged 20 and over were classified as obese (with a Body Mass Index (BMI(Body Mass Index)) of 30 or above) – more than three times as much as in 1981, the first year of record.
13 Norwegian 4,477,725 ?
14 Scotch-Irish 4,319,232 ?
15 Swedish 3,998,310 ?

I quickly looked up these #s and dates & added in parentheses to the most popular countries of early immigrants to US..according to census.
*haven't checked sources or anything.*
And I didn't include the WW2 famines in Europe to places like France, etc. as the last famine because it wasn't listed on that Wikipedia page.. ? There's so many different regions and famine in places like Africa, China, and Russia I haven't looked those up yet.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines

Adventurista

Historical data is interesting, but as a practical lookback, I am not sure of a correlation of obesity post-famine. If usual normal agrarian food conditions and early conservation/preserving techniques had endured, then maybe. Food type as in ultraprocessed junk foods and excess availability displaced prior consumption, and I would tend to think has a more significant correlation to rising rates of obesity. From a personal observation and common sense perspective.

AdahPotatah2024

So what about that Dutch study?
"An analysis of historical medical records found that men who were prenatally exposed during early gestation to the Dutch famine of 1944-1945 were 30 percent more likely to be overweight with a Body Mass Index of 25 or over at age 19, compared to a similar group not exposed to the famine. Professor L. H. Lumey at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health led the study, which is published in the International Journal of Obesity(link is external and opens in a new window). The study confirms evidence on the health risks of prenatal famine exposure, which also includes diabetes and schizophrenia."

And then there's evidence of epigenetic sensitivities?

Adventurista

So what percentage do the men pre-natally exposed represent to the whole of the population experiencing rising obesity, and how many generations forward does the pre-natal group carry a sensitivity forward?

I am not dismissing the influence of genes on people. Some are immutable such as number of fingers, but some are recessive that can later be turned on or off through lifestyle exposure... such as a propensity to develop metabolic diseases, in whole or in part triggered by lifestyle.

Further are social and cultural impacts. Our family who experienced the dust bowl and great depression were impacted with attitudes and beliefs the rest of their lives, not only with food choices but also other lifestyle choices such as exceptionally frugal and use, keep and reuse, recycle or use for parts later with everything.

But a prosperity ensued, and along came big food and a multitude of ultraprocessed junk foods, advertising to entice excess eating, which adds direct weight from the consumption, and turns on genes/pre-disposition of disease.

So what is the underlying cause of increasing obesity, current conditions of excess food and cultural beliefs OR famine in the distant or far distant past, 1 or multiple generations removed?

Surely there is a need to understand if a particular genetic mutation or gene turns on in order to develop possible therapeutic treatment... But also to look at current social and cultural conditions to develop health, medical, social and cultural support strategies to help people stop gaining, even reverse their personal obesity.

AdahPotatah2024

I agree! I'm not saying this is the one cause of rising obesity, but genetics definitely should be considered.

"Factors that may contribute to excess weight gain among adults and youth include genetics; types and amounts of food and drinks consumed; level of physical activity; degree of time spent on sedentary behaviors, such as watching TV, engaging with a computer, or talking and texting on the phone; sleep habits; medical conditions or medicines; and where and how people live, including their access to and ability to afford healthy foods and safe places to be active."

https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/weight-management/adult-overweight-obesity/factors-affecting-weight-health

AdahPotatah2024

Adventurista wrote: »

So what percentage do the men pre-natally exposed represent to the whole of the population experiencing rising obesity, and how many generations forward does the pre-natal group carry a sensitivity forward?

*Just my guess*
from reading a few research papers is that we'd probably retain some vulnerabilities up to 7-8 generations after famine or severe food insecurities.I have at most 1 or 2 % of my 7th generation's grandmother's dna, right? I love that the study in epigentic changes in plants indicated 7-8 generations!
Her lifestyle/eating habits might be passed down even further.
& Of course, our lifestyle and other factors would determine how much those vulnerabilities would affect health.

AnnPT77

I wouldn't say genetic tendencies are irrelevant, and I'm in no position to discount historic famine as a factor in those genetic tendencies.

I think there's a serious gap in the argument that that's a key factor in the "obesity crisis", though. The obesity crisis is generally considered to have begun sometime in the 1980s.

If national origin of one's ancestors is to be considered a major factor in current obesity in the overall population, we need to demonstrate that there's been a significant change since the 1980s in the statistically typical national origin of US ancestors. While there have been demographic shifts (including national origin of individuals so their ancestors), I don't think they're major enough to explain why the incidence of obesity in the US went from around 13% in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980 to something around 40% more recently.

The prevalence of junk food or highly processed food is sometimes suggested as a key, and that may be in the mix. Having been alive and adult before 1980, I know that those foods were generally available at that time, if not as widely consumed then. I feel like the role of reduced daily life (non-exercise) movement, and what I'd call "food culture" have pretty big parts in this. I think those don't get as much attention.

By "food culture", I mean what's considered normal and polite when it comes to food habits. People eat out more, and it seems like a surprising (to me) number don't even know how to cook from scratch, as compared with norms around 1980. (That's not a value judgement, BTW - just a difference.)

When I use the word "polite", which does kind of imply value judgement, I'm talking about the expectation that people will bring treats to many kinds of events (kids' sports games, for one example) in contexts where that wouldn't have been the expected thing decades back (not impolite to do, but also not impolite to NOT do at that time); the perceived politeness of having a coffee, soda pop, slushie, or other drink in one's hand in nearly any social setting (not common back then, in fact would've been seen as odd at best in some contexts back then, maybe even rude); and that sort of subtle stuff.

Among those kinds of factors, it's likely literally hundreds of calories per day in changed behavior: More eating, more accepted and even expected in diverse circumstances; less movement in daily life because of increased automation/mechanization or outsourcing of physical tasks. According to various sources, a few hundred excess calories daily is enough to explain the increased incidence of obesity in the population over the last 50-ish years, statistically. That could be a combination of reduced movement plus increased eating, not just either/or.

AdahPotatah2024

True.. genetics is, i think, a key factor in why some can adapt to all this food surplus without a care and not gain a pound, though,while others are inclined to take it to the limit! (Which is really what interests me,lately.)

PAV8888

I'm willing to posit both natural selection (we're here as opposed to not existing) and learned behaviours.

Why are most of us who need to lose weight here? By accident?

On reflection, I would say it's pretty obvious that we are each and every one of use "aces" at gobbling calories -- highly successful at maximizing intakes and with a good natural propensity to avoid spending calories unless we go out of our way to try to do so!

So here we are. Now what?

My grand-parents were circa WW1 refugees (or large scale population movements if you prefer) from 3 out of 4 sides and even the fourth side is iffy if you go one back. My mom had a pantry full of expired food, and I STILL go out food shopping whenever I'm pissed off. And, of course, throwing out food items, even expired or unwanted, is sacrilege because of the starving children and all the people experiencing food insecurity--shame on me for thinking about throwing out stuff.

So.

How does knowing all this change whether and how I get to manage my weight?

AdahPotatah2024

My family is anti-waste as well. I had to go through my uncle's kitchen and throw away 15 year old Swiss Miss mix and beans and expired canned goods several years ago. An acquaintance that I dine with sometimes drives me crazy by leaving half her food for them to throw away. Of I knew her better, I'd probably take it home myself in a to go box, haha.

Well, as Winston Churchill wrote, “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

I think it helps to analyze why we do certain things before we implement lifestyle changes. We can tell ourselves that we don't have a reason, right now, to stock up to make sure that we don't starve later!

AnnPT77

There are also nurture/culture influences on body weight from the movement side of the equation, it seems.

For example, I've seen research papers that suggested long-term obese people (even after weight loss) were more . . . placid, for lack of a better term . . . in their daily life movement patterns than always-slim people, on average. To be clear, this is not a veiled "fat people are lazier" claim. Instead, it's talking about minor spontaneous movement through the day, things like the tendency to shift positions while sitting, maybe stretch, using gestures when speaking, etc., etc. Also, a small study suggested that fidgety people may burn up to low hundreds of calories daily compared with similar people who were not fidgety.

On a thread where I mentioned a small study with this summary conclusion:

Our study provides evidence that habitual leg shaking can boost overall energy expenditure by approximately 16.3%. This simple and feasible approach offers a convenient way to enhance physical activity levels.

Another person commented this way in response:

On the other hand, I can sit so still my Fitbit might record it as sleep lol!

In my family, fidgeters and jigglers were reprimanded and told to STOP...not that this was a problem for me, but my ex-husband, whom I met as a teenager, was always dadding his leg or bouncing his foot. He had ADHD and was (and still is) quite lean 😆.

I'm not saying that by itself would be big numbers. It's just an example of how cultural norms and upbringing about movement may matter, too.

Adventurista

Yes. I was taught to be still, not fidget, not use hands to speak. Definitely family norm there, cultural norm as well?
-- this was back in the day of hats and gloves... dresses, rarely pants, during prosperity of post-WWII with rebellious hippie counter-culture letting it all handlg out... it was a bit of cultural whiplash.

springlering62

Adventurista wrote: »

Yes. I was taught to be still, not fidget, not use hands to speak. Definitely family norm there, cultural norm as well?
-- this was back in the day of hats and gloves... dresses, rarely pants, during prosperity of post-WWII with rebellious hippie counter-culture letting it all handlg out... it was a bit of cultural whiplash.

I was brought up with deaf siblings, in the days when “Total Communication” was the thing. Any method you could use to communicate: signs, body language, notes, charades, pictures, pointing, Signing Exact English, American Sign Language, whatever it took to understand and be understood.

I think that’s the source of my wild hands. Didn’t hand it down, for sure.

We used to make stuff up when we didn’t know the signs. Snow was “white rain”, lol. But we all knew what it meant. Oh, and I remember the sign for “poor baby” was an hardcore insult , and we’d get chewed out for using it. In retrospect, I wonder if that’s what it was really the sign for lol. It does seem a bit sexual now lmao.

If you asked me to talk without my hands now, I probably couldn’t complete a sentence. All the NEAT that resulted probably is what kept me out of morbidly obese, and I mean that.