Slashdot Mirror


Obesity Contagious?

An anonymous reader writes "University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers have found that certain human viruses may cause obesity, and by extension make being severely overweight a contagious condition. 'It makes people feel more comfortable to think that obesity stems from lack of control,' the lead researcher says. 'It's a big mental leap to think you can catch obesity.' But other diseases once chalked up to environmental factors, like stomach ulcers, are now known to stem from infectious agents."

18 of 840 comments (clear)

  1. Common viruses to look out for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    clear cut and easy to remember: "Burger King", "McDonalds", etc.

    1. Re:Common viruses to look out for... by cocoamix · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ah, the dreaded Fat Cow Disease.

    2. Re:Common viruses to look out for... by dstewart · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's odd that the idea that a virus can contribute to, or even be a causation of obesity is so poorly received here. Bear in mind that these are experiments on test animals on a controlled diet, not some survey of McDonalds patrons.

      Perhaps because the linked article was a blog...

      Study on rhesus monkeys and marmosets.

      "In study 1, we observed spontaneously occurring Ad-36 antibodies in 15 male rhesus monkeys, and a significant longitudinal association of positive antibody status with weight gain and plasma cholesterol lowering during the 18 mo after viral antibody appearance. In study 2, which was a randomized controlled experiment, three male marmosets inoculated with Ad-36 had a threefold body weight gain, a greater fat gain and lower serum cholesterol relative to baseline (P 0.05) than three uninfected controls at 28 wk postinoculation. These studies illustrate that the adiposity-promoting effect of Ad-36 occurs in two nonhuman primate species and demonstrates the usefulness of nonhuman primates for further evaluation of Ad-36-induced adiposity."

      --
      Not every argument requires reduction to absurdity.
  2. Funny thing by g8oz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Funny how this virus is so widespread in the United States.

    I'm sure it has nothing to do with the availability of junk food and the national automobile culture.

    1. Re:Funny thing by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In America, rural zoning tends to be much more isolationist - suburbs are islands to themselves - without a store in sight. It's quite depressing actually.

      ... and also quite dangerous. The entire economy and even basic survival hinges on those service station pumps never running dry. I don't see how the US could survive another 70s style oil embargo given the incredible suburban expansion of the last 25 years.

  3. Virus Warning by Mr.Ziggy · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I fully cook it, can I eat fat people without getting fat?

  4. Everything is contagious, in the social sense by EVil+Lawyer · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Check out Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion.

    There are some staggering data in there regarding the extent to which humans mimic the behavior of similar others. For example, there are statistically significant increases in the number of teenage-couples killed in car accidents among those teenage-couples who recently heard about accidents where teenage couples were killed. The increase is not observed in teenage-couples who didn't hear about the recent accidents, and is not observed among singleton teenagers or older couples who have been exposed to the news. These results have been repeated with a wide range of demographic groups, on a wide range of phenomena, and have been found to be consistent and strong. Hmm, notice a rash of mine accidents recently? Yes, I'm sure it's media focus-bias to some extent...

    I really urge you to check that book out if you're interested in the instinct-level mental processes that control us without our being aware of them, or if you want to be..ah...evil?

  5. Conservation of energy revoked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, we will have hordes of overweight people going "See, told you so! I'm sick!"

    What they will conveniently forget is convervation of energy: The only way someone can gain weight is by eating too much, compared to how much energy their bodies spend on moving and keeping you alive. End of discussion.

    No matter which disease one may have, you will not catch 25 pounds from taking a stroll through the mall or, say, through breathing thin air. If a disease lowers the energy requirements of the body, the cure is to eat proportionally less.

    TFA isn't clear on this, but I wonder precisely what is suggested being the cause of obesity in 'infected' individuals. Are they saying people simply become unable to control the urge to eat uncontrolled amounts of unhealthy foods?

    So how do you catch 'soccer moms', no bikes as kids, McD dinners and no exercise in school?

    Also strange is the fact that ulcers were commonplace all over the world, due to often being an infectious disease. Yet I wonder why the Europeans haven't 'caught' obesity on the US level yet? It is not like we haven't been mingling with them for, say, a few hundred years.

    1. Re:Conservation of energy revoked? by Golias · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What they will conveniently forget is convervation of energy: The only way someone can gain weight is by eating too much, compared to how much energy their bodies spend on moving and keeping you alive. End of discussion.
      [snip]
      If a disease lowers the energy requirements of the body, the cure is to eat proportionally less.


      For some people "too much" food might be just enough to nourish them. It's not widely reported, but lots of dieting fat people die and/or suffer severe health problems from malnutrition every year. Still fat, yet starved of required nutrients.

      We've tried bullying fat people to "quit eating so much and go for a walk" for decades now. Results have not been stellar. Maybe we ought to try something else. Maybe it might be worth a shot to afford them the dignity of any other human beings, and find ways to help them get thinner.

      It's not like fat people want to be fat. You can't even make the case that the pleasures of eating and relaxation (or avoiding the discomfort of working out and going hungry) are more important to them than their health and appearance. There are people who are suicidal over their weight, and willing to endure painful, dangerous, ill-advised medical procedures to correct it.

      Something is clearly wrong with these people, whether it's psychological or physiological. Instead of mockingly call them out for being less wonderful than you (when, for all you know, you would fair far worse if cursed with their metabolism), how about we try to find a solution.

      In spite of how much the results of studies like this might displease the "personal responsibility uber alles" crowd, I'm glad studies like this are being done. If there really does turn out to be a viral cause, discovery of it is cause for celebration.

      Science before dogma.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Conservation of energy revoked? by Archtech · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "What they will conveniently forget is convervation of energy: The only way someone can gain weight is by eating too much... End of discussion".

      Unless you are an expert on human metabolism, you cannot possibly make such an assertion. And if you were, you wouldn't.

      What you overlook is that human beings are animals, and hence complex biochemical factories, not simple heat engines. If you know how much petrol a car engine of a given capacity burns in a given time, you know how much energy it produces, right? (Even this is only broadly true). But animals are very inefficient converters of energy. I forget how much of the energy we use gets "wasted" as heat, but it's a large fraction. (Just as well, or we'd die of hypothermia). Other energy goes into running various chemical reactions, not all of which are necessarily indispensable or even useful.

      As soon as you think about if for a few seconds, it's clear that the body has a lot of discretion in just how it uses the 200 calories you get from, say, eating a bun. These viruses could jam the "make fat" control hard over against the end stop.

      Maybe you think it is fine for one person to eat 2900 calories a day, do little exercise, and stay thin; while another person eats 2000 calories, walks six miles and gains weight. But how is the second person going to control their weight in the long run? The only practical way we have of controlling calorie intake is our appetite. Have you ever tried measuring your exact calorie intake while eating a normal diet? It's far from easy. Moreover, how are people to know how much they should be eating, if it's 2000 for one person and 3000 for someone else of similar size, shape, and exercise habits? We can't all become dietary scientists, walking about with computers and clipboards, weighing every bite of food we eat.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    3. Re:Conservation of energy revoked? by Golias · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We HAVE solutions. They just aren't quick or pleasant. The solution to gross obesity is to radically alter your lifestyle PERMANENTLY.

      Yes, and the solution to kick heroin is to stop shooting up, but even if you TYPE IT IN ALL CAPS, a junkie is still going to need more help then you shouting at them.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:Conservation of energy revoked? by n9uxu8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uhmmm...not to be all PC or anything, but I AM fat and there is nothing wrong with me. I eat a bit too much and tend to pray at the alter of convenience a bit too often. It's not a virus, it's nobody's fault but my own, and it's none of your @$*! business (societally-speaking, please don't feel that that is directed at you)!

      I put more miles on a bicyle in a month than I'm betting most of you do in a year, I work out regularly and have developed a liking for yoga. Still fat, but I start a long-term diet program on Monday (after the trip out to see Kevin Smith talk in Indy) which will likely help take off unwanted pounds.

      My point? We're all individuals. Some folks are fat; some are thin. Some folks want to blame someone/thing else for lifes woes; some don't. Some folks are fat for medical conditions beyond their control; some folks are fat because chicken wings is tasty. Whatever...it's individual and statements such as "Something is clearly wrong with these people" piss me off.

      Dave

    5. Re:Conservation of energy revoked? by Hoknor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The issue you are missing here is that for some obese people, it's not excess storage, it's missallocated storage. They contract a virus that lives in and feeds on fat cells, so it encourages the person who has a healthy diet and who gets exercise to continue storing nutritional intake as more fat cells instead of as the muscle cells that they would have stored that nutrition as if they did not have the virus. That is what is being suggested by these studies.
        This is also what is leading nutrition experts to question the portayal of obesity in and of itself as a health risk. It's just not the case that being over a certain weight means you are at risk for disease, it's an indicator that you will want to monitor certain things perhaps, but at the end of the day, skinny or fat, if you binge on sugar, you are at risk for diabetes.

  6. Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Well duh...

    Look, the cause of obesity is really very simple: the human body (and its ancestors) evolved in environments in which food was scarce, and during that time mechanisms came into being which helped to deal with that scarcity. As a result, it has built-in mechanisms to ensure that there will be sufficient energy store for the body to use for all but the most drastic of food shortages. These mechanisms include the fat store, the tendency for fat to accumulate much more easily than it's used, and an appetite control mechanism that encourages overeating (since who knows when the next meal will become available?).

    Now take the human body and put it into an environment where all the food one could ever want is easily available for the taking (all it requires is a small amount of money). What do you expect will happen?

    Well, duh...the body will behave as it always has: under the assumption that while food might be plentiful now, it's not likely to be plentiful for long, so better stock up now while it can.

    And thus, obesity.

    And the reason obesity is so difficult to deal with, and why sustained weight loss has such a lousy track record (95%+ failure rate), is simple: to fight obesity, you have to fight your own body's instinctive drive to "save up for a rainy day".

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  7. Contrary to what you guys are ranting... by Churla · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't think their study is trying to say 'Cure this virus and cure obesity'. It seems more to point towards reasons that some people invariably gain more weight eating the same foods as others. There are factors of caloric absorbtion, and also factors of metabolisms being capable of breaking down and using fat. Many metabolic processes can easily be affected by contagens in the system.

    What is to say that some viruses might also be affecting this?

    If some treatment can just help a person who has struggled against weight their whole life have a slightly easier struggle without harming their body in a more severe way then more power to them.

    --
    I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
  8. Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin by mo^ · · Score: 5, Funny

    The LaterOn ?

    --
    bah!*@%!
  9. But the cause of being overweight is OBVIOUS! by NiteShaed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay, so there are lots and lots of comments here that boil down to "put the cheeseburger down!", but in a stunning reversal, I actually RTFA. True, people should try to eat well, and on the whole I agree that most people should spend a little more time walking (or biking, or jogging, or whatever) and a little less time in front of the television. That being said, the article raises some interesting possibilities. If viral activity could be a cause of weight-gain, I'd rather know about it than simply insist that the guy who's oozing out of the sides of his seat down the aisle from me has no self-control.

    There was a time when illness was "obviously" the result of evil spirits playing havoc on people who were not devout enough. I'll bet at some point there were people standing around the village square commenting on how "if that fool had just spent a little more time praying than [insert sinful activity here], he obviously wouldn't be lying on the ground hacking up a lung and burning up from fever". Just because this line of research goes against what we believe to be common-knowledge isn't really a reason to jump all over it, we can be wrong.

    So, no, it's clearly not an excuse to give up eating well or exercising, but I'm not going to just say there's nothing to this until there's been a bit more study.

    --
    Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  10. Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp by corbettw · · Score: 5, Funny

    Also, we used to run after our food and throw spears at it before we could eat.

    I had to chase down a hot dog vendor today and throw spears at him before he'd stop to sell me a Chicago dog with everything and an icy cold Coca-Cola. Does that count?

    --
    God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.