Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Scientists identify 84 possible causes of obesity. Also known as the complete menu at McDonald's   (gma.yahoo.com) divider line 23
    More: Interesting, gut bacteria, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, menu, American Medical Association, obesity  
•       •       •

3929 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Aug 2013 at 9:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-23 10:37:05 AM  
3 votes:

Surpheon: Daffydil: I read 'Control group lab mice' and quit reading your comment.  I'm basing my opinion on myself.

Shrug, you're welcome to be stupid. Do you only use drugs developed by testing on yourself too?

I find it fascinating terrifying that carefully bred animals kept under documented identical exercise and diet conditions for thirty years are showing weight gain at about the same rate as the human population.


FTFM. That's some seriously creepy shiat.
2013-08-23 10:34:14 AM  
3 votes:
  Daffydil: I read 'Control group lab mice' and quit reading your comment.  I'm basing my opinion on myself.

Shrug, you're welcome to be stupid. Do you only use drugs developed by testing on yourself too?

I find it fascinating that carefully bred animals kept under documented identical exercise and diet conditions for thirty years are showing weight gain at about the same rate as the human population.
2013-08-23 09:43:38 AM  
3 votes:

Daffydil: Unless you have a medical problem, exercise is the answer to fat...doesn't matter what you eat, or drink as long as you get up off of your ass...


Complex problems often have simple, incorrect answers. Yours would be one.  Control group lab micehave gotten fatter in the last 30 years, along with all manner of animals. That strongly suggests there is an environmental cause at play beyond Twinkies and Coke (whose consumption does not correlate well with the growth in obesity). It should also be noted that the whole country is not under 40 - it does matter what you eat as well once your on the downhill side of your life.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3081766/pdf/rspb20101890 .p df
2013-08-23 11:14:37 AM  
2 votes:

Magorn: after a while I gave in to all the haters who said "oh this just CAN'T be healthy  you have to be doing some sort of secret damage to your kidneys/liver/ SOMETHING   no way it's this easy"


There's a lot of Puritanism tied up in America's attitudes about fat and diet. (And everything else). That hits it square on the head. The more difficult something is, the more "worthy" it is.

Admittedly it'll be annoying to me if I lose my excess weight through a couple years of Epic Struggle, and then someone comes out with a partial-cannabinoid-agonist appetite-suppressing pill or something. But I'll try to be happy for other porkers who will be then able to lose weight easily.
2013-08-23 10:12:26 AM  
2 votes:

Daffydil: Unless you have a medical problem, exercise is the answer to fat...doesn't matter what you eat, or drink as long as you get up off of your ass...


BZZZT!

totally wrong.   sorry

Me working out Areobically, setting gym records on the computerized rowing machine, 1/hr a day 7 days a week/52 weeks a year for 3 years?  =334-331 lbs
Me working out 3 days a week =370 lbs
ME dropping my carbs to 40gm a day and working out once a week when I could? 260 lbs six months later
me eating like shiat for ten years then going low carb again with zero gym time? 235 and counting in 3 months
2013-08-23 09:27:23 AM  
2 votes:

mr0x: It doesn't matter how active you are. If you don't eat, you won't get fat. will die.


be realistic...

/oh wait...this is Fark
2013-08-23 09:12:11 AM  
2 votes:
Unless you have a medical problem, exercise is the answer to fat...doesn't matter what you eat, or drink as long as you get up off of your ass...
2013-08-23 08:31:37 AM  
2 votes:
anyone struggling with their weight that there may be more to shedding surplus pounds than simply cutting back on calories and putting in a few extra treadmill sessions.

But this is completely counter to what the Fark scienticians tell me.  How could such a learned group be wrong?

/I sound fat, because I am.
2013-08-23 10:50:34 AM  
1 votes:

Gaseous Anomaly: Resist the temptation to ever utter that phrase when discussing diets. The same thing NEVEr works for everyone.


That's valid. I guess I'm just encouraged by the fact that I was a "fat boy" from age 3 until 37. I thought I could never feel comfortable without a shirt on, but now I do. Maybe I really am a unique and special snowflake like my mom always promised.

2.bp.blogspot.com
2013-08-23 10:49:20 AM  
1 votes:

Magorn: almost right, the AND is that the Insulin your body has to produce to deal with the sugar, also sets of a series of microhormones in your body on of which s very specifically the fat storage signal.  If that signal is off you don;t store fat, and if insulin's opposite number, glucagon is predominant in your system, the fat BURNING switch gets turned on and you lose weight, or at least body fat, irresepctive of how many calories you eat


That too.  Was trying to keep it simple.  Unfortunately I've been forced to learn more about blood sugar chemistry and mechanics than I ever hoped to over the last decade.
2013-08-23 10:45:49 AM  
1 votes:

AngryDragon: bmongar: Actually food calorie counts are inaccurate as to how usable the calories are.  That is 100 calories of sugar in a food with both soluble and insoluble fiber will yield less caloric intake that 100 calories of sugar without the fiber

I have to disagree with this.  100 calories of sugar is just that, 100 calories of sugar.  It takes the same amount of "work" to burn that much potential energy.  The advantage of fiber is that it slows the rate of absorption for those 100 calories.  So instead of your body getting the whole thing pumped into your bloodstream at once, it is metabolized more slowly.

This is an advantage because of how the body produces insulin and what it does.  Sudden blood sugar spikes cause large insulin releases.  This will ultimately result in excess sugar being stored as fat.  This is also why you get a "sugar crash".  Once you have burned what you can use and it has stored everything away, the excess insulin causes your blood sugar to drop.  Then you have to eat to feel better again.  It's a vicious cycle.

That's why sugar is so terrible for you.  Your body can only use so much, the rest is stored.


almost right, the AND is that the Insulin your body has to produce to deal with the sugar, also sets of a series of microhormones in your body on of which s very specifically the fat storage signal.  If that signal is off you don;t store fat, and if insulin's opposite number, glucagon is predominant in your system, the fat BURNING switch gets turned on and you lose weight, or at least body fat, irresepctive of how many calories you eat.
2013-08-23 10:38:06 AM  
1 votes:
I hate health articles that say "Sleep moar!" like it's that simple. Some of us have insomnia. You know what happens when I am cautioned about the health risks of not sleeping enough? It stresses me out and I can't sleep.
2013-08-23 10:36:06 AM  
1 votes:

odinsposse: Also, before the low carbers come out in force to ruin this thread with their psuedo-science: Low carb diets help people lose weight by lowering their calorie consumption. Ketosis doesn't effect weight loss. People improve their blood sugar by losing weight even when they do it on a high carb low fat diet. It's wonderful you found a diet that works for you but you guys are becoming the diet equivalent of Randian gold bugs.


Or we could come to the conclusion that the human body is a complex open system and that there are too many variables to determine a single solution for everyone. (You opened this door)

Yes, I am on a low carb diet, sanctioned by my doctor.  Primarily because my blood sugar was a disaster and I was a severe reactive hypoglycemic for 7 years.  I tried the high-carb, low-fat thing for years.  The result was my doctors thinking I had heart problems (ironically).  72 hours after being put on a ketogenic diet, my blood sugar stabilized completely and has been for over a year.  I sleep at night, have tons of energy, low cholesterol, my bloodwork is always right down the line of normal, and as a bonus I've lost 70 pounds.  The only time that I have a blood sugar swing is when I eat a lot of carbs and then I am right back to square one.

It may not be right for everyone and I still wouldn't recommend it only for weight loss, but don't knock something that works very well for some people.
2013-08-23 10:31:40 AM  
1 votes:

Lady J: tfa is going to annoy me too much to read

aside from a handful of people with rare conditions, the single cause of obesity is:
calories in > calories out

it makes me lol when my friends embark on complicated explanations about eating protein and carbs together between 7 and 8 pm, or some secret thing in pineapples. they just don't want to face it. they overeat.


No  you have a view of nutrition that is as simplistic, wrong, and outdated as thinking the the four basic chemical elements are air, earth, fire and water.  Just because I feel like personal experience compels me to be an evangelist on this point, so others won;t suffer the way I did, I'mma gone lay some real science on you:

We've learned a lot about biology and chmistry over the last hundred years, you may want to do some reading on it.   In particular  You may want to google the term Eicosanoid (or Icosaniod)  The fella that discovered them won a Nobel Prize in Medicine.  Seems there are two main series of them
One series, created when Insulin is predominant in your system,  tend to
Increase blood clotting
restrict your airways
increase "cellular proliferation" (which can cause/facilitate cancer)
Cause your body's cells to internally produce cholesterol rather than scavenging it from your blood stream, thus increasing your serum cholesterol.
Raise your blood pressure
Cause your body to create and store body fat.

the Second series, produced when Gulcagon is predominant in your body:
Lowers Blood pressure
opens airways
decreases blood clotting
reduces serum cholesterol
retards cellular proliferation
and Burns body fat


That series one list look a lot like the "symptoms" of our current "obesity epidemic" (including the sudden spike in Asthma, the increase rates of heart disease high BP etc)?

Now, here's the fun part,  the more insulin that's in your body not only the more the series 1 eicosaniods are being produced, but, the more insulin RESITANT your body is getting overall.  meaning your body has to produce MOAR INSULIN, meaning even more eicosaniods...wash, rinse, repeat until you have type II diabetes from a burned out pancreas  (ever wonder why sudden weight LOSS is a symptom of diabetes)

You fix this really simply:  you lower your body's demand for Insulin by severly estricting your carbohydrates for a few moths.   This gives your cells a chance to re-sensitize to insuling over all (chromium and Vit D. Speed this process enormously).  Then going forward you try to keep them far lower than you typically see in the very bad for you "typical" american diet.

The side effect of this process is whe your carbs are in the very low state, calories and fat intake simply DO NOT MATTER, you body cannot store the excess caloric intake as body fat because that interal switch is not on, so it literally passes out fo your body unused  (which can be gastrointestinally unpleasant, but that's it)  which is why the Atkins folks can lose so much weight while still eating bacon, or cheese or other highly satisfying but otherwise forbidden foods.


Now if you still think I'm wrong, SHOW ME where the above science is wrong.  Not your opinion, not some longitudinal weight loss study, but debunk the actual, scientifically validated chemistry outlined above.
2013-08-23 10:26:57 AM  
1 votes:

sigdiamond2000: Can the vast, vast majority of it be controlled with diet and exercise? Probably.


Of course. The interesting question is how to make that less of an uphill battle. If there's a ghrelin analogue around in the environment, it's going to make dieting a lot harder, and so getting rid of that would go a long way.
2013-08-23 10:10:26 AM  
1 votes:

Lady J: Theaetetus: sigdiamond2000: Theaetetus: Lady J: tfa is going to annoy me too much to read

aside from a handful of people with rare conditions, the single cause of obesity is:
calories in > calories out

It's a good thing you were too annoyed to read the article, because it specifically called out people like you.

Not really:

"At the end of the day, we still have the law of energy balance to contend with," he said. "If you ingest more than you expend you are going to gain weight, period."

No, really. Next paragraph:
"We've focused almost all our resources on the so-called 'Big Two' of diet and exercise for more than 50 years and it hasn't helped," he said. "We will have to move beyond 'eat less and move more' if we want to make progress."

as someone else has already said... 'eat less move more' would work IF people did it


I bet you're an advocate for abstinence-only sex education, too.
2013-08-23 10:08:07 AM  
1 votes:

Gaseous Anomaly: Lady J: tfa is going to annoy me too much to read

aside from a handful of people with rare conditions, the single cause of obesity is:
calories in > calories out

it makes me lol when my friends embark on complicated explanations about eating protein and carbs together between 7 and 8 pm, or some secret thing in pineapples. they just don't want to face it. they overeat.

Yes, we all know that, it doesn't tell us anything interesting.

The interesting question: WHY do they overeat?

If it's just a moral failing of low self-control, what is it that makes it difficult for them? Porkitude doesn't correlate particularly well with low self-control in other areas (holding down jobs, savings, the 'marshmallow experiment', etc.), so why does it manifest in one area?

Why are people fatter today than last generation? If it's just because this generation is more worthless as human beings, why wasn't that the case when Romans were making that complaint about their kids?

/I sound fat
//calorie counting, dropping pounds pretty quickly, but it's about as hard as if all of Fark had to quit drinking
///personal pet theory to explain the increase: some combination of more "superstimulus" food, and some hormone analog or other in the environment


among people I know, who are not fat fat (im far to shallow to hang out with really unattractive people), it's actually more that they are really, really sedentary, and don't realise how much so. they literally do no exercise, and never walk anywhere, so their requirements are very low

as such, you've only got to get greedy and eat three sandwiches for a lunch a couple of times a week and you will slowly, slowly gain weight... without feeling like they overeat to any extent
2013-08-23 10:02:29 AM  
1 votes:

Gaseous Anomaly: Pangea: I've forgotten the list of conditions causing people to gain weight while running a calorie deficit, so I'm looking forward to that again.

The simple explanation: a lot of people who think they're running a calorie deficit, aren't.

That's because nobody understands that calorie counts on food (from e.g. nutrition labels) are pretty accurate, but calorie counts for exercises (e.g. 30 min of 3.5mph walking for a 300-pounder "burns 265 calories") are wild-ass guesses.

Pretty much the only way to actually know how many calories you burn is to measure your food intake, measure your fat loss (by weighing in often and smoothing with a running average), and compare.

THAT is the most helpful response for most people, not "ha ha thermodynamics".


Actually food calorie counts are inaccurate as to how usable the calories are.  That is 100 calories of sugar in a food with both soluble and insoluble fiber will yield less caloric intake that 100 calories of sugar without the fiber.
2013-08-23 09:55:16 AM  
1 votes:

Lady J: tfa is going to annoy me too much to read

aside from a handful of people with rare conditions, the single cause of obesity is:
calories in > calories out

it makes me lol when my friends embark on complicated explanations about eating protein and carbs together between 7 and 8 pm, or some secret thing in pineapples. they just don't want to face it. they overeat.


Yes, we all know that, it doesn't tell us anything interesting.

The interesting question: WHY do they overeat?

If it's just a moral failing of low self-control, what is it that makes it difficult for them? Porkitude doesn't correlate particularly well with low self-control in other areas (holding down jobs, savings, the 'marshmallow experiment', etc.), so why does it manifest in one area?

Why are people fatter today than last generation? If it's just because this generation is more worthless as human beings, why wasn't that the case when Romans were making that complaint about their kids?

/I sound fat
//calorie counting, dropping pounds pretty quickly, but it's about as hard as if all of Fark had to quit drinking
///personal pet theory to explain the increase: some combination of more "superstimulus" food, and some hormone analog or other in the environment
2013-08-23 09:54:19 AM  
1 votes:

Surpheon: Control group lab micehave gotten fatter in the last 30 years, along with all manner of animals.


Yeah, that's some weird shiat. Domestic dogs and cats are getting fatter, but you could  almost explain that away with arguments that fat owners eating fatty foods are giving them fatty table scraps, Fatty McFatfat... but lab mice?
There was a Slashdot article about this a few days ago, and someone pointed out that (a) cat food frequently contains up to 30% carbs, and (b) cats can't even taste sugar, let alone digest it.
2013-08-23 09:51:09 AM  
1 votes:

Lady J: tfa is going to annoy me too much to read

aside from a handful of people with rare conditions, the single cause of obesity is:
calories in > calories out


It's a good thing you were too annoyed to read the article, because it specifically called out people like you.
2013-08-23 09:36:47 AM  
1 votes:

EvilEgg: anyone struggling with their weight that there may be more to shedding surplus pounds than simply cutting back on calories and putting in a few extra treadmill sessions.

But this is completely counter to what the Fark scienticians tell me.  How could such a learned group be wrong?

/I sound fat, because I am.


Precisely. We have been repeatedly assured by the FarkMD's that loosing weight is very simple, you just need to decrease your calories and increase your exercise.  There are NO OTHER FACTORS. NONE. EVER. So if you are fat it is simply because you lack their Superior Willpower and self control.

I sound fat because I was 150lbs ago, and know from personal experience just what utter hogwash that is.
2013-08-23 09:12:10 AM  
1 votes:
"Dhurandhar likens obesity to other chronic diseases. Just as the term cancer covers the numerous conditions that occur when abnormal cells divide out of control, obesity may not be a single disease but rather, a group of diseases tied together by the symptom of too much body fat, he said. "

We should ask doctors throughout the developing world how they treated these diseases as they seem to have had a lot of success.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report