Without a doubt, Lend-Lease food proved vital to the maintenance of adequate nutrition levels for Soviets and other Lend-Lease beneficiaries. In 1944, two percent of the United States’ food supply was exported to the Soviet Union, four percent to other 42 Lend-Lease recipients, one percent to commercial exports, and 13 percent to the 12 million in the U.S. military who participated in the war between 1941 and 1945. This aid was made possible due to sacrifices made by the American people and an enormous increase in American agricultural and industrial production – up 280 percent by 1944 over the 1935–39 average.
About $11 billion in war materials and other supplies were shipped to the Soviet Union from the United States over four major routes between 1941 and 1945. In addition to military equipment, the USSR received non-military items like cigarettes, records, women’s compacts, fishing tackle, dolls, playground equipment, cosmetics, food, and even 13,328 sets of false teeth.
Soviet requests for food emphasized canned meat (tushonka), fats, dried peas and beans, potato chips, powdered soups and eggs, dehydrated fruits and vegetables, and other packaged food items. Dehydration, which made shipping food to the Soviet Union possible under the program, led to a rapid expansion of American dehydrating facilities, which eventually influenced the domestic market and the diet of American people in the post-war period until today.
Lend-Lease accounts show that, in 1945 alone, about 5,100,000 tons of foodstuffs left for the Soviet Union from the United States; that year, the Soviets’ own total agricultural output reached approximately 53,500,000 tons. If the 12 million individual members of the Soviet Army received all the foodstuffs that arrived in the USSR through Lend-Lease deliveries from the United States, each man and woman would have been supplied with more than half a pound of concentrated food per day for the duration of the war.
Due to changes in the food production in post-war America, enhancements were required in the seats of two iconic American venues – the Lincoln and Ford Theatres
Post-World War II changes in food production, supply and dietary guidelines were significantly influenced by wartime rationing, technological advancements and changing consumer preferences. The war led to rationing and shifts in food availability, while also spurring the development of new food technologies and influencing consumer preferences. These factors, combined with the rise of food marketing, dramatically altered the American diet.
Rationing to ensure equitable distribution of scarce resources significantly impacted food availability and consumption patterns. Rationing of items like sugar, coffee, meat, and butter altered what foods were readily available and how they were prepared. Rationing encouraged the use of less expensive cuts of meat and the creation of recipes that stretched the available meat supply, such as meatloaf and stuffed peppers. Frozen food, previously not widely adopted, gained traction during the war due to rationing and the need for longer-lasting food storage.
New technologies developed during the war in food preservation and packaging led to the rise of industrially processed foods. Convenience foods became more prevalent as the emphasis shifted towards ease of preparation and speed; however, often at the expense of nutritional value. Home appliances like refrigerators and freezers became more common, further impacting food storage and preparation methods.
Exposure to new and different cuisines during the war expanded American palates and led to the adoption of new flavors, dishes and changing consumer preferences. Subsequently, food companies invested heavily in advertising and marketing, influencing consumers’ food choices and creating demand for processed foods. The rise of chain restaurants and fast food further altered eating habits, emphasizing speed and convenience over nutritional value.
In summary, the post-war period saw a complex interplay of factors that dramatically changed the American diet and the way we approach food today. Rationing during the war, technological advancements in food production and supply, and evolving scientific understanding of nutrition all contributed to the shift towards a more processed and convenience-driven food culture. This, in turn, led to the development of dietary guidelines that emphasized nutrient adequacy and, eventually, the prevention of chronic diseases.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
The negative outcome of the post-war food production and supply have been an undeniable obesity of the American population of all ages, ethnicities and social groups. Two dramatic examples can be found in architectural changes. Due to changes in the food production in post-war America, enhancements were required in the seats of two iconic American venues – the Lincoln and Ford Theatres in Washington D.C. This was a direct result of a rapid enlargement and obesity of the American population.
The Lincoln Theatre is a historic venue that opened in 1922 and was once a hub for entertainment. The Theatre has undergone several renovations throughout its history, with significant work done in the 1990s and more recently in the 2020s. These renovations aimed to restore the historic theater of the 1920s, enhance accessibility, and improve amenities for both patrons and performers. One of the key renovations and improvements included installing new, enhanced and cushioned seats suitable for today’s enlarged American audience.
Similar seat renovations took place in the Ford Theatre; the original chairs were replaced with larger, more modern seats in the late 1970s and early 1980s because the original replicas were deemed too small and uncomfortable by audiences. The original chairs in Ford’s Theatre, installed in 1865, were cane-bottomed, high-backed wooden chairs. These were replaced with replicas in 1968 during the restoration. The replica chairs were found to be uncomfortable, leading to their replacement with larger, more modern seats in the late 70s/early 80s. They are significantly larger 1900s-style chairs from another theater, installed in 2009-2010 to accommodate today’s Americans.
The views expressed here are those of the author.
6 Comments
Why spam multiple sites w/ the same article? Do multiple print magazines publish the same identical story? How odd.
My good friend, PhD wildlife biologist, commented the following: Thinking about your article while enjoying my breakfast, I think that one of the most important changes in our marketed food supply (what’s offered for sale to consumers) was the big push for shelf-life and portability, which probably got a huge boost during the war effort you describe but then continued full-speed ahead after the war, too, because of the profit margins for such foods. I suspect that was the major force behind the creation of what are now called “highly- or ultra-processed” foods, which suffer from serious lack of nutrition (because their nutrient balances have been radically changed to reduce their food value to microorganisms) and infusion with artificial preservatives, desicants, and stabilizers. More recently, such artificial foods have even been designed to be addictive. All they while, they are mostly made of cheap carbohydrates and cheap seed oils (themselves being artificial [never having existed that way in nature] and virtually poisonous because of their inherent chemical instability when exposed to oxygen) while deficient in nutrients other than artificially added nutrients. The combination of being cheap, long shelf life, highly tasty, addictive, and not nutritious has been a perfect recipe for the global pandemics of obesity and general poor health of today’s western societies. Although that trend probably started with a huge boost during the WW2 effort, it accelerated even more after the war years. But the needs for long shelf-life and portability during the war must have been instrumental in starting it. Oh well, this has been good “food for thought” this morning.
Michael Pollan suggested that we Eat Food (real, unprocessed), Mostly Plants, and Not Too Much.
When you don’t have a point or when responding to a question no one asked, consider avoiding the penned flatulence approach. No one likes it.
If this was the case, airlines would be making bigger seats for larger Americans. However, this is not the case; airline seats get smaller and smaller.. The only airlines that I can think of that went with larger seating is Fiji Airways.
Good article and interesting. I would add also with automation and diminishing agrarian lifestyles our population has become more sedentary as well.