Obesity: Why are we getting fat? :epizza:

[Racoon]

Drink Green Tea.
Drink Grapefruit Juice.
Eat lots of High Fiber foods.

Eat a good ratio of clean proteins/ Complex Carbs/ and quality fats.

Do 1 hour of cardio every day.

If you still keep getting Fat, then you have a real quandry ??????????????????????

Blame it on something other than yourself.. society perhaps..
Let them tell you its a Gene, and you No Control over it..

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by Michaelangelica

Unbelievable, so the drug companies (Zyprexa) the soda companies (corn syrup) the food industry (MSG and friends), the fast food giants (trans-fats, fats, sugar) all get a free ride and someone who may have a genetic predisposition to obesity gets penalised?
This is what happens when prejudice and "simple answers" (always wrong) replace science.

No one forced them to take the drugs, drink the soda, buy bad foods at the store, or eat fast food. Genetic predisposition does not equal genetic predestination.

I am of the mindset that healthy individuals, who actively make choices to be healthier, should not have to bare the financial responsibility of those who make choices that lead to obesity. When you consider that obesity related illness is the largest growing cost to health care, and each individual costing over $1200 more a year to care for on average, I have no problem with requiring them to cover a larger share of their own health care. Obesity is 100% preventable, no matter what condition, food, or genetic predisposition you chose to attribute the epidemic to.

USATODAY.com - Health spending soars for obesity

Health spending soars for obesity
By Nanci Hellmich, USA TODAY
Private health insurance spending on illnesses related to obesity has increased more than tenfold since 1987, according to the first research to quantify the trend.

The growth in obesity has fueled a dramatic increase in the amount spent treating diabetes, heart disease, high cholesterol and other weight-related illnesses, says the study, which is published today in Health Affairs, an online journal of health policy and research.

Overall, employers and privately insured families spent $36.5 billion on obesity-linked illnesses in 2002, up from an inflation-adjusted $3.6 billion in 1987. That's up from 2% of total health care spending on obesity in 1987 to 11.6% in 2002, the latest year for which data are available.

On average, treating an obese person cost $1,244 more in 2002 than treating a healthy-weight person did. In 1987, the gap was $272.

[Michaelangelica]

See also
http://hypography.com/forums/news-in...-hold-key.html
and
We are what our parents ate(ScienceAlert)

[pamela]

Nitack, there is a little more going on in your treadmill idea than you think

From Science Daily
Physiologists analyzing obesity, heart disease, and diabetes found that the act of sitting shuts down the circulation of a fat-absorbing enzyme called lipase. They found that standing up engages muscles and promotes the distribution of lipase, which prompts the body to process fat and cholesterol, independent of the amount of time spent exercising. They also found that standing up uses blood glucose and may discourage the development of diabetes.

Stand Up For Your Health -- Physiologists And Microbiologists Find Link Between Sitting And Poor Health

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by pamela

Nitack, there is a little more going on in your treadmill idea than you think


Stand Up For Your Health -- Physiologists And Microbiologists Find Link Between Sitting And Poor Health

I will gladly take all credit for saving the world from obesity through my development of standing workstations...

We will just ignore the fact that others thought of it first

[Michaelangelica]

Female Brains More Valuable Than Males, Decrees Mother Nature
By News Staff | January 16th 2009 12:00 AM | Print | E-mail | Track Comments

Writing in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, a group of researchers found that nutrient deprivation of neurons produced sex-dependent effects.
Male neurons more readily withered up and died, while female neurons did their best to conserve energy and stay alive.

That's right, nature has declared female brains should survive with a lot less than males.
Take that, glass ceiling!

The idea that the sexes respond differently to nutrient depravation is not new and revolves around the male preferences to conserve protein and female preferences to conserve fat.

Female Brains More Valuable Than Males, Decrees Mother Nature

Sugar Might Help Fight Infections
Rubin-Bejerano had evidence that neutrophils respond to beta-glucan. After coating tiny beads with a variety of substances (including beta-1,3-glucan and beta-1,6-glucan), she exposed them to the neutrophils and was surprised to see a striking difference in their response to the two sugars. The neutrophils quickly engulfed many of the beads coated with beta-1,6-glucan, but only a few of those covered in beta-1,3-glucan.

http://www.scientificblogging.com/ne...ght_infections

[Michaelangelica]

Possible drug target for obesity treatment a no-brainer: study

February 4th, 2009 in Medicine & Health / Research

Scientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine have discovered a gene that when mutated causes obesity by dampening the body's ability to burn energy while leaving appetite unaffected.
. . .
The findings also add new knowledge to the burgeoning field of epigenetics, in which heritable changes in gene expression or physical appearance are caused by mechanisms besides changes in the underlying DNA.
. . .
Zhang said his group will continue to look for more detailed mechanisms involved in how the enzyme regulates the relevant genes and changes in the metabolic rate.
. . .
That body of work has contributed significantly to a new understanding that mutations in epigenetic factors such as histone demethylase enzymes can have profound physiologic effects

Possible drug target for obesity treatment a no-brainer: study


Now? You mean she has just got around to reading post number one in this thread?

Now blogger Jennifer Gibson pulls together some of the research to argue that obesity may in fact be caused, at least in some people, by a virus called Ad-36.

Early research found that 30% of obese people were infected with Ad-36, while only 11% of non-obese people were infected.
New research finds that Ad-36 has a direct effect on human fat stem cells. The virus infects the fatty tissue and increases replication, differentiation, and accumulation of fat cells. Ultimately, this leads to larger fat cells, and more of them.
The virus also increases lipid sensitivity and decreases leptin secretion of the new fat cells.

She also says that sometimes people who know other people who gain weight rapidly can even catch the virus.
She goes on to argue that the spread of obesity cannot entirely be explained by sociological factors like too much TV watching orpoor eating habits, that the existence of some kind of fat bug may go explain the speed with which the problem has progressed.
If Gibson is right, then some people may be able to solve some of their weight problems with the application of an anti-viral, or some other treatment that attacks viruses.

Such as???
The Obesity Bug, And Other News From Nerdland | Science Not Fiction | Discover Magazine

[Michaelangelica]

Originally Posted by Racoon

Drink Green Tea.
Drink Grapefruit Juice.
Eat lots of High Fiber foods.

Eat a good ratio of clean proteins/ Complex Carbs/ and quality fats.

Do 1 hour of cardio every day.

All good advice.
For everyone, all the time? What is you are old, have a heart problem or exercise induced asthma? If you are Old you may be in a care facility where they pump MSG into you food to keep you eating.
MSG is on every grocery shelf in one form or another.

Originally Posted by Racoon

If you still keep getting Fat, then you have a real quandry ??????????????????????

Blame it on something other than yourself.. society perhaps..
Let them tell you its a Gene, and you No Control over it..

Keeping digging your hole, I will keep filling it in with the research I come across.

I am not saying you are wrong, but I don't think you have the full story.
We (most of society) are ignoring the research because of our blinkered prejudices.

("Every complex problem has a simple solution - and it is wrong")

[HydrogenBond]

The human body works under the energy balance of input - output = accumulation. This is a simple energy equation. However, each of the three variables has a range of possible parameters some under the control of will, some psychological and some genetic or chemical in origin.

Input; this is the variable that may be the least attached to genetics, unless one correlates input to genetic based behavior for certain people. If one has the "crave bacon and ice cream gene" this can over ride free choice. Input is not just how much you add but also connected to content or diet.

Input can also have psychological connections, such as pleasure that can over ride a good diet that is bland. Input can also be social programming affects such as marketing, family tradition, etc. that form input habits.

Output can have many genetic and willful components. Some people have higher natural metabolism while others have lower. From the willful end, one can increase exercise to increase output.

Accumulation is what is gained from the first two variables. This too can have genetic affects, since some bodies will store body fat easier and therefore make it energy content less available for output.

The arguments everyone has presented actually address the three variables from the many different valid angles. Once all the parameters are integrated around the simple energy balance, it is easier to tailor treatment to the individual.

[Kayra]

Well said HB