I'll bet this article was written by a fatty.

/promoting their fatty agenda

Most likely if you are fat you have already overwhelmed your bodies ability to store fat in a healthy manner. It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.

Or, alternatively, being fat is unhealthy.

It's funny because they're fat. And lazy.

So....couldn't get the article, not signing up.

So then... Picture of health?



/Not sure if fapable

Adman12: manimal2878: Most likely if you are fat you have already overwhelmed your bodies ability to store fat in a healthy manner. It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.

Too bad they won't read all the way to the end, and find out that the article recommends a "sin tax" on junk food.

The rationale behind the "sin tax" is all wrong. It needs to be the companies selling this crap who are penalized, not the poor people who can only afford to eat off the dollar menu.

The "sin tax" should also be used to help subsidize the sale of healthier items.

GacysBasement: It's funny because they're fat. And lazy.

If you call that living.

The burger in the article looked awesome.

UberDave: manimal2878: It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.


As far as excuses go, it will rank right up there with "being able to ride the elevator alone" and "surviving falls from great heights".

So when the elevator breaks from a ton of lard getting on they'll survive the fall?

New Scientist? Oh right they calm to be an "an ideas magazine" . . . so I'm guessing this is some fatties idea of why they aren't a disgusting ham-beast.

Bruce Campbell: The burger in the article looked awesome.

Glad I wasn't the only one who thought that.

/not a fatty

UberDave: manimal2878: It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.


As far as excuses go, it will rank right up there with "being able to ride the elevator alone" and "surviving falls from great heights".


On the contrary, fatties aren't necessarily more likely to survive a fall from a great height...we just make a bigger mess when we burst at the bottom. :)

/would make a semi-decent sized mess

So skinny is the new Black then, right?

Station: So....couldn't get the article, not signing up.

The SacBee recently did this too, requires registration, looks like I will proceed normally and just comment in here without reading the article. Fat people are a drain on society, there, that feels better.

I heard from my doctor that fat people are harder to perform surgery on and have a higher chance of dying. One of the problems he mentioned was that it was difficult to find all the arteries or veins or something like that. It made it difficult to stick the needle in just the right place.

dragonchild: Oh, and CygnusDarius? That girl is not fat. She's way more hittable than the anorexics that make the covers of women's magazines.

she may not be fat, but I can tell you that on a scale, she most definitely registers as overweight.

dragonchild: News flash: The body will do its best to cope with your retarded abuse of it. Put down the burger and run a few laps if you still can.

Oh, and CygnusDarius? That girl is not fat. She's way more hittable than the anorexics that make the covers of women's magazines.

Oh, for fark's sakes, it's called being cynical!.

Obesity: Food kills, flab protects

OBESITY kills, everyone knows that. But is it possible that we've been looking at the problem in the wrong way? It seems getting fatter may be part of your body's defence against the worst effects of unhealthy eating, rather than their direct cause.

This curious insight comes at the same time as several studies distancing obesity itself from a host of diseases it has long been blamed for, including heart disease and diabetes.

Instead, these studies point the finger at excess fat in the bloodstream, either when the fat cells of obese people finally get overloaded or when lean people who can't store a lot of fat eat too much. This seems to have a destructive effect by provoking the body's immune response.

None of this changes the fact that too much rich food and too little exercise is bad for you. But viewing obesity as a symptom of an unhealthy diet, rather than the direct cause of disease and death, plus a better appreciation of the immune system's reaction to fat, should radically change our understanding of what is shaping up to be one of modern society's biggest health scourges. The findings also point to new ways to treat diabetes, heart disease and other diet-linked conditions.

In recent years, most rich countries, and some poorer ones, have seen a massive rise in so-called "metabolic syndrome", whose symptoms can include insulin resistance, high blood cholesterol and an increased risk of diabetes, heart disease and stroke. That the syndrome goes hand in hand with obesity is well known, but exactly how all these conditions are linked is unclear.

In an attempt to determine the effects of obesity itself, diabetes researchers Roger Unger and Philipp Scherer, both at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, reviewed several recent studies of the role of fat cells in humans and mice.

In particular, the pair looked at the fates of people with a genetic condition that means they can't make their own fat cells and mice genetically engineered to have low supplies of these cells and fed a diet that would make normal mice obese. They found that, despite not being obese, both tend to develop metabolic syndrome earlier on in life than their overweight, overfed counterparts.

This led Unger and Scherer to conclude that obesity protects the body from the effects of overeating by providing somewhere safe to deposit the dietary deluge of fat and sugar, which in excess is toxic to many body tissues (Trends in Endocrinology and Metabolism, DOI: 10.1016/j.tem.2010.01.009).

Only when the body's fat cells, or adipocytes, are crammed to capacity do the problems of metabolic syndrome begin. The fully engorged adipocytes begin to die and leak their contents into the bloodstream, including saturated fatty acids such as palmitic acid. Such fats then accumulate in tissues such as the liver, pancreas and heart, where they may prompt the symptoms of metabolic syndrome.

The theory is certainly plausible, says Gökhan Hotamisligil, a diabetes and obesity researcher at the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, who was not involved in the study. "When fat cells break, it's like an oil tanker being hit," he says. "It unloads this toxic cargo, almost like an oil slick."
When fat cells break, it's like an oil tanker being hit. It unloads this toxic cargo, almost like an oil slick

It also fits with what we know about age-related obesity. Leptin, a hormone produced by fat cells, directs surplus dietary fat into adipocytes and orders other cells to burn off any fat. Unger and Scherer point to rodent studies showing that leptin's ability to do this drops off with age. The researchers conclude that fats locked safely away in adipocytes get released as we age, and that this could explain why older people who are obese are more at risk of metabolic syndrome.

By shifting the blame from fat to food, Unger and Scherer's hypothesis also helps to explain why not all overweight people develop metabolic syndrome and some lean people do. In 2008, a study found that half of overweight and a third of obese Americans had healthy metabolic profiles, whereas a quarter of "lean" people had signs of metabolic syndrome (Archives of Internal Medicine, vol 168, p 1617).

So why is fat a problem when it breaks free of the protective adipocytes? The answer, it seems, lies with the immune system.

Preeti Kishore and her colleagues at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, injected the amount of fat typically found in a large beefburger into the blood of 30 volunteers. The volunteers' bodies responded by producing 3 to 5 times as much as normal of a hormone called plasminogen activator inhibitor-1.

"We were surprised by the magnitude of the rise in PAI-1," says Kishore. The researchers suggest that this increase in PAI-1 leads to metabolic syndrome. This makes sense as we already know that PAI-1 aggravates the symptoms of diabetes by making cells less responsive to insulin, which regulates blood concentrations of glucose. It is also involved in blood clotting, and blood clots can lead to strokes and heart attacks.

Kishore's team was equally surprised to discover that PAI-1 was not produced by fat cells, as had been assumed, but immune cells called macrophages lodged in fat tissue. Fatty acids and fat cells both needed to be present to trigger the production by macrophages of PAI-1 (Science Translational Medicine, DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000292). Kishore says drugs that block PAI-1 or mop up free fatty acids might help prevent metabolic syndrome.

Meanwhile, the link between metabolic syndrome and the immune system has been further confirmed by Hotamisligil and his colleagues. When they fed mice a fat-rich diet, the animals rapidly became obese, insulin-resistant and developed other symptoms of metabolic syndrome. But mice lacking a gene called PKR stayed lean and healthy on the same diet (Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.001).

It seems that PKR activates a "gang" of other genes responsible for inflammation, insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction. "PKR is a high-ranking officer in this destruction," says Hotamisligil, who adds that blocking the activation of PKR might be a way to fight both obesity and metabolic syndrome.

Unger stresses that the best way to prevent metabolic syndrome is eating less and exercising more. Still, drugs based on a greater understanding of the immune system's role in the condition could be a useful last resort.

Incorrect reading, subby. The article clearly states that your disgusting fat is preventing your revolting diet from killing you sooner, fatty, and your rotund mounds of vomit inducing flab is possibly your first warning sign your filthy fat eating habits are slow suicide.

So, you know, in other words, treat luxury junk food as a luxury, not a staple of your diet. Moderation, biatches.

secularsage: The rationale behind the "sin tax" is all wrong. It needs to be the companies selling this crap who are penalized, not the poor people who can only afford to eat off the dollar menu.

Practically that will never happen though - tax the producer, and they'll just roll that cost into the price of the product. The end consumer *always* pays.

Katie98_KT: dragonchild: Oh, and CygnusDarius? That girl is not fat. She's way more hittable than the anorexics that make the covers of women's magazines.

she may not be fat, but I can tell you that on a scale, she most definitely registers as overweight.

Of course she is. The problem with our society isn't that we correctly label people as being over or under ideal weight. Ideal weight is a set of brackets worked out mostly by the insurance community to use as a leading factor in predicting life expectancy in the absence of other contributing factors. That's why the BMI debate about muscle is silly. The tables tell you that the majority of people with BMIs higher than 25 or so are going to generally live a shorter life and be more expensive than someone with a BMI between 20 and 24.

Where society has fallen down is what to DO with information. We need to stop treating it like a magic line between attractiveness and repulsion. It's okay to understand that your body is overweight. It's important to understand when your body is medically obese. I've been obese and now I flirt with the line between "healthy" and "above average" depending on how good I've been that week. There's no way anyone else can really tell which side of the line I'm on on any given day, but it's useful for ME to know.

Just like my girlfriend is beautiful, and if she pigs out for a couple weeks, kicks a hair across the overweight line as well. When I started dating her, she had to fight hard to keep above the unhealthy below average line. She's beautiful and has a healthy amazing body every day, but keeping an eye on those markers help give warning that we're being lazy with our eating habits and need to be good a week or two.

A Sin Tax on pleasure food is a nice idea and all, but how about we work on stopping the government *subsidies* for the crap first?

The HFCS, the unhealthy way and degree to which we subsidize animal products, etc -- fix that. Then we'll talk Sin Tax.

FTFA: "They conclude that an 18 per cent tax on soda drinks would reduce the weight of the average US citizen aged 18 to 30 by 2.25 kilograms per year "
Good thing so many of us are morbidly obese. If this passes, by 2050 we'll all be 200 pounds lighter!

ringersol: A Sin Tax on pleasure food is a nice idea and all, but how about we work on stopping the government *subsidies* for the crap first?

The HFCS, the unhealthy way and degree to which we subsidize animal products, etc -- fix that. Then we'll talk Sin Tax.


Yes, please.

kid_icarus:I'll bet this article was written by a fatty.

/promoting their fatty agenda

They in it with the aliens. They're building landing strips for fat aliens. I swear to god!

/or was that the queers?

There are thousands of fatties.
As with all negative traits, people need to be convinced that there is nothing wrong with them, so there will always be various studies that will relieve them of guilt and point blame elsewhere or show that there's nothing they could do about it.
Like just about every study in the field of psychology.

manimal2878: Most likely if you are fat you have already overwhelmed your bodies ability to store fat in a healthy manner. It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.

Shut up or I'll sit on you.

Mr Guy: Of course she is. The problem with our society isn't that we correctly label people as being over or under ideal weight. Ideal weight is a set of brackets worked out mostly by the insurance community to use as a leading factor in predicting life expectancy in the absence of other contributing factors. That's why the BMI debate about muscle is silly. The tables tell you that the majority of people with BMIs higher than 25 or so are going to generally live a shorter life and be more expensive than someone with a BMI between 20 and 24.

Where society has fallen down is what to DO with information. We need to stop treating it like a magic line between attractiveness and repulsion. It's okay to understand that your body is overweight. It's important to understand when your body is medically obese. I've been obese and now I flirt with the line between "healthy" and "above average" depending on how good I've been that week. There's no way anyone else can really tell which side of the line I'm on on any given day, but it's useful for ME to know.

Just like my girlfriend is beautiful, and if she pigs out for a couple weeks, kicks a hair across the overweight line as well. When I started dating her, she had to fight hard to keep above the unhealthy below average line. She's beautiful and has a healthy amazing body every day, but keeping an eye on those markers help give warning that we're being lazy with our eating habits and need to be good a week or two.

You sound fat.

X-boxershorts: There are far more interesting articles than that on this site...

Like: The Guinea Worm (new window)
Just don't do a GIS for the Guinea Worm (new window)
You've been advised.

IonBeam2: Another reason why government-subsidized health "insurance" is a bad idea: forcing everyone to pay for fat people being fat.

After paying to help them to get that way

ronaprhys: Mr Guy: Of course she is. The problem with our society isn't that we correctly label people as being over or under ideal weight. Ideal weight is a set of brackets worked out mostly by the insurance community to use as a leading factor in predicting life expectancy in the absence of other contributing factors. That's why the BMI debate about muscle is silly. The tables tell you that the majority of people with BMIs higher than 25 or so are going to generally live a shorter life and be more expensive than someone with a BMI between 20 and 24.

Where society has fallen down is what to DO with information. We need to stop treating it like a magic line between attractiveness and repulsion. It's okay to understand that your body is overweight. It's important to understand when your body is medically obese. I've been obese and now I flirt with the line between "healthy" and "above average" depending on how good I've been that week. There's no way anyone else can really tell which side of the line I'm on on any given day, but it's useful for ME to know.

Just like my girlfriend is beautiful, and if she pigs out for a couple weeks, kicks a hair across the overweight line as well. When I started dating her, she had to fight hard to keep above the unhealthy below average line. She's beautiful and has a healthy amazing body every day, but keeping an eye on those markers help give warning that we're being lazy with our eating habits and need to be good a week or two.

You sound fat.

And your girlfriend sounds fat too.

Great. So this fatass will continue to sit on her butt and burgers all day:

dragonchild:
Oh, and CygnusDarius? That girl is not fat. She's way more hittable than the anorexics that make the covers of women's magazines.

you're right. for some reason she turns me on

/serious
//plus i already know she sucks a mean one

disagrees

I blame God. He made me hungry, he's a chubby chaser.

What about Samoans? Dont' they eat mostly pineapples & island trail mix? I thought that stuff was supposed to be healthy.

Tequila Monster: kid_icarus:I'll bet this article was written by a fatty.

/promoting their fatty agenda

They in it with the aliens. They're building landing strips for fat aliens. I swear to god!

/or was that the queers?

I feel like we're channeling Seanbaby circa 1999...

manimal2878: Most likely if you are fat you have already overwhelmed your bodies ability to store fat in a healthy manner. It seems to me that as far as what you should eat this is meaningless and will probably give obese people another excuse to be obese.

That statement makes as little sense as anything I've ever heard.

The point of TFA is that if the food isn't stored as fat, it's just going into the bloodstream. The body storing fat is the healthy manner. To wit: if a person with more propensity to being fat, and a person with more propensity to being slim, eat the same diet, the fat one (who stores the fat) will be healthier than the thin one (whose fat goes straight to the bloodstream).

God damn, man. RTFA.

rickbauls: disagrees

Derp.

"Look what he eats and he's not fat. BMI is a lie!"

/Quit justifying your fat lifestyle.