Slashdot Mirror
Born with Couch Potato Genes?
An anonymous reader writes "Science Daily is reporting on an experiment that suggests that an individual's activity level shows a genetic basis. From the article: 'Research conducted by scientists at the Oregon National Primate Research Center at Oregon Health & Science University reveals that a person's level of activity is likely an intrinsic property of that individual. [...] Overall, these findings suggest that it is likely to take a significant conscious effort to change one's level of physical activity and override one's intrinsic inclination to be active or inactive. To state it more plainly, if you're a couch potato, suddenly becoming active may be harder than you think,'"
How soon before we can blame everything we do on genetics?
To state it more plainly, if you're a couch potato, suddenly becoming active may be harder than you think,'"
Insensitive clods! It's already hard enough to reach for the remote control!
Oh, great. Things like these always give people a scapegoat; "I'm not lazy, it's my genes." I'm not saying that it not true, but people like "solid" excuses to be even more lazy.
The article summary looks wrong. I don't see anything in TFA itself which indicates that laziness is a result of some genetic factor. All they say is that it's intrinsic to the individual - being a rhesus monkey in this case - that a given individual displays similar activity levels in both a stimulating and a non-stimulating environment.
"...if you're a couch potato, suddenly becoming active may be harder than you think"
No, I've always thought it would be too hard. Why do you think I'm still a couch potato?
How much harder than impossible can you get? :(
Then again, I see nothing in the article that suggests such behavior/attitudes isn't learned from parents at an early age.
They need to do a lot more study, involving actual humans, twins separated early, adopted children, blah blah blah.
Nothing to see here, move along. (Never thought I'd actually say that on here, but this article is wildly speculative, with little evidence put forth for a true genetic basis. It fully warrants such a comment.)
it is my parents' fault that I'm such a lazy bum. Now I can fwd this link to them.
I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
I'm giving up on free will.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
....but the fact that we are here is directly related to the fact that our foreforefathers had to run away from scary predators; like tigers and dinosaurs and macrosoft. If they weren't athletic they'd be dead - and therefore we would not be here. SO if its couch-potato in our genes then technically our ancestors would have been bloody lazy. And dino food. Survival of the fittest anyone?
/. would have had ancestors who woulda been too friggin lazy to uh... procreate anyway.
Besides, if it's in the genes then
I love humanity, it is people I hate
Plus, it appears the experiment itself was pretty meaningless, and the conclusions therefrom unsupported. Basically, they observed that some monkeys were active and others weren't, and that the level of activity didn't depend on the amount of space a particular monkey had to be active in. Wow.
The only attempt to change an independent variable appears to be as follows:From this, the scientist concludes:I don't think so. How do we know any particular monkey made an "conscious effort," much less a "significant conscious effort," to change its level of physical activity? Perhaps more fundamentally, there is not evidence the scientists even provided any incentive for the monkeys to do so. Simply putting a monkey in a bigger cage may not have given it any incentive or reason to be more active.
There seems to be an assumption that because they gave a sedentary monkey more space, it should have wanted to be more active, and because it wasn't, in fact, more active, this must be because its inactivity was "an intrinsic property of that individual." The scientist's argument assumes his conclusion. What if the money+ simply did not want to, and indeed had no reason to, move?
Put a banana at the other end of cage, and watch Mr. Sedentary Monkey take off like a rocket.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Overall, these findings suggest that it is likely to take a significant conscious effort to change one's level of physical activity and override one's intrinsic inclination to be active or inactive.
New!
Pr-escr|ptioN gene therapy delvred r|ght t o y0u r door. 3nl4rg you_R worK ethic by four-00 percnt!
See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil... ..and their long lost brother "can't be bothered to do any evil"
Thanks for that. I'd read it, but I can't really be bothered.
We have to believe in free will. We've got no choice!
A real couch potato doesn't waste time "thinking" about "suddenly becoming active."
"Honey, after you finish typing my Slashdot comment, will you get me a beer?"
Nice theory, but I think cheap gasoline and fast food in supersize portions had more to do with it.
This crap has come up before. I'm thinking of The Bell Curve, by Herrnstein and Murray. They claimed then that a whole raft of things were inherited which have since been debunked. These things included intelligence, financial ability, criminal inclination and etcetera...
Unless they have the evidence, I shall reserve my judgement. This isn't news, just a guess. No matter how educated, this is not news, just a glorified blog report. Flame me if you want, this is a serious criticism.
America's fatness has nothing to do with genes. It's all about TV, Corn Syrup, and McDonalds.
I know lots of Fat people... how can I not? I am an American. I am surrounded by fat people all the time. Hell, I used to BE a fat person, but after losing 70 lbs and becoming the poster-boy for weight loss, I've discovered that it all comes down to one thing:
If you consume fewer calories than you expend, you will lose weight. PERIOD. Of course, there are many ways to go about doing this, and the only sustainable way is to exercise to maintain muscle mass.
The whole idea behind long-term weight loss is to increase your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) by increasing your muscle mass, while at the same time decreasing your caloric intake to below your BMR. That's all it takes. The rate at which you lose weight will be proportional to the delta between your Daily Caloric Intake and your BMR - on average.
One pound of fat contains approximately 3600 calories. So, for example, you consume 200 fewer calories per day than you expend on average, you'll lose one pound of fat every 18 days. Of course, fat is not the only thing you can lose, so weight loss will vary somewhat.
Also, exercise adds to your daily caloric expenditure, which can accelerate weight loss significantly. One might expend 1800 calories by riding a bike 50 miles at a high rate of speed, or expend 800 calories by running 6 miles, or expend 400 calories shoveling snow for an hour.
In any case, what it all boils down to is being aware of the simple fact that you have to get your energy from somewhere, and if you do not get enough energy from the food you eat, your body will turn to its fat stores. It doesn't matter what excuse a fat person uses, whether that be, "It's my glands," or "It's my genes," or whatever. Thermodynamics is LAW, and excuses cannot break it.
When I saw the title, I expected a study involving hundreds of separately adopted twins. 29 female monkeys in cages is a methodological joke. No conclusions can be made about genetics from this study, and the conclusions made should not necessarily be generalized to humans.
I can't speak for other religions but coming to faith in Christ is all about personal responsibility. Jesus said, "Go and sin no more". Peter said, "Prepare you minds for action; be self controlled." Solomon said, "Have the wisdom to show restraint". The message of personal responibility is woven throughout the Bible.
I can't speak for other religions but coming to faith in Christ is all about personal responsibility. Jesus said, "Go and sin no more". Peter said, "Prepare you minds for action; be self controlled." Solomon said, "Have the wisdom to show restraint". The message of personal responibility is woven throughout the Bible.
Modern Christianity has about as much to do with the Bible's teachings as McDonald's does with health food.
24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
They showed him doing some exercise, then pausing to ask his wife to bring him a cherry soda. I thought "perhaps WATER would be a better choice there". Later he was shown eating a bucket of KFC. Hey buddy, try eating some VEGETABLES once in a while. The whole time, he was complaining that his weight was a "genetic problem".
Well if his genetics or at least social disposition lead him to believe that he wanted a cherry soda and a bucket of KFC he had no choice in the matter. Well... He sort of did, but the neurons in his brain automatically fired off saying he needed or at least desired the cherry soda. His mind was simply unable to comprehend the desire for water so it did not happen.
Now saying people have no free will make many people angry and start talking about personal responsibility and he mearly had to choose the water.
Well... If you study Buddhism you will discover there is free will but it doesn't work like that.
Where as the normal free will person will say "I shouldn't drink the cherry soda because it is making me fat." and he will more likley fail to do so because he will come up with a counter reason like "Maybe just this one time" or "I'll drink one now but tommorrow I won't..."
That doesn't solve the problem. Chances are he'll just keep drinking the soda.
The more self-aware Buddhist person will go "I am aware for my desire for cherry soda. This maybe because of my genetics and I know it tastes better than water." and then goes on to meditate or at least rational and seperate themselves from that desire... (And maybe speculates on what makes a cherry soda and water taste the way it does and why he desires one over the other) not the obtainment of cherry soda itself.
It sounds hokey but it works. Or at least better than sheer willpower... But you have to learn a bit more about Buddhist meditation to really understand.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
I have found this to be very true, and when I find myself getting lazy, I recall these words, and force myself into action.