Slashdot Mirror
Gut Bacteria In Slim People Extract More Nutrients
Beeftopia writes "Researchers discovered that inserting gut bacteria from obese people into mice without gut bacteria led to the mice becoming obese. Gut bacteria from slim people inserted into the same mice did not lead to mouse obesity. The researchers concluded (abstract) that gut bacteria from the slim people were more efficient at extracting nutrients from food than those of the obese."
This is a FIAF thing..
http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2007/12/fiaf-whos-fat-is-it-anyway.html
It's not that they're better at extracting nutrients, it's that they influence the body to expend more or less enery. The nutrient extraction is a side effect.
I do wish researchers would read the relevant literature before jumping to conclusions.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
"However, the diet was also important for creating the right conditions for the lean twin's bacteria to flourish. A bacterial obesity therapy seems unlikely to work alongside a a diet of greasy burgers."
Guess what, proper diet still required. /surprise.
So now instead of saying 'I have big bones', one can say 'I just got veeeery hungry gut bacteria!'?
I'm thinking increasing usage of Hand sanitizer is killing our gut bacteria. Is there any correlation to this ?
I decide how much to eat and when, thus maintaining a healthy BMI and I get out and exercise frequently.
BTW it's Friday, time for my customary run to the beer fridge.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
We need more butt fucking with thin women to spread gut bacteria!
So I'm chubby because I have socialist bacteria in me? I'm gonna hafta swallow a little Fox News TV for the buggers.
Table-ized A.I.
I'm not fat. I'm just more efficient at extracting nutrients than you.
Are the thin people actually healthy or are they just... thin. When they hit old age will they have the energy to climb a flight of stairs, or will their gut bacteria be eating it all?
Obesity is supposed to be adaptive, right? What if the conditions for which it's adaptive (long periods of little food) occur? Who will be the better survivors. Don't think it can't happen here. We're just one Monsanto fuck-up, a war, and dictatorship away...
Curious but not entirely unexpected. We are only beginning to understand the microbiome, but clearly it is important.
I wonder if cold weather might affect our gut bacteria too. I have unintentionally lost a good deal of weight in a short time in a cold, dry environment (at least 30 pounds in three months), but regained it when returning to a hot, humid climate. Of course, the cold weather also burned more calories - but I also ate a good deal more than usual. More notably, I note that people living in hot, humid environments often tend to put on weight more than those in colder climates - but there are likely many other factors.
From my understanding of the article, more efficient gut bacteria convert food into forms more readily burned and less stored as fat.
Have gnu, will travel.
That's what I was curious about. Obviously, there's something more going on here, because it's not the amount of food you eat, or even the type, that determines if you get fat, it's what sort of surplus or deficit you're running after the food gets digested that ultimately matters.
And more efficient or less efficient bacteria would only dictate how much food you would have to consume to absorb a certain number of calories, not how much of it winds up being stored as fat.
even with 200+ miles on a bike a week I won't go below that.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So the mice became obese after being injected with gut bacteria from obese people. But the mice that were injected with gut bacteria from non-obese people did not. Or put another way, before the injection the mice were not obese, and after the injection the mice were still not obese. Since those mice experienced no change whatsoever, it makes no sense to conclude that the non-obese bacteria is more efficient at extracting nutrients. If that was the reason for the change, shouldn't there be some difference after the injection of the non-obese bacteria?
And how do you cultivate good bacteria?
Don't eat junk.
Stardocking.
Google it.
Get a transpoosion.
I wish I had mod points. You useless post deserves to be -1.
Here's a clue: [rant deleted]: you eat too much and never exercise.
To quote the article:
Mice with the obese twin's bacteria became heavier and put on more fat than mice given bacteria from a lean twin - and it was not down to the amount of food being eaten.
Next please....
By careful work with mice, their experiment does indeed demonstrate causation. It was a very clever series of experiments, which is probably why it was accepted into the journal Science. Step back a bit and think: how likely is it that reviewers for Science--probably some of the world's top scientists--missed something as basic and as obvious as correlation != causation?
By the way, this subject seems to generate an angry, viceral reaction for you. Why is that? Does your self-worth revolve around feeling superior to fat people?
Buy some yogurt?
Stardocking.
Google it.
Is that a new show on SyFy?
I was joking, I meant the bacteria *in* the yogurt, not necessarily after you eat it.
It has long been recognized in farming that parasites keep animals thin. Same for people. Gee!
In evolution, one of the biggest threats to humans was starvation. So, what we consider a fat-causing problem these days probably used to be a big evolutionary advantage at some point.
If gut bacteria from slim people actually extracted more nutrients from food, bacteria would need less food to extract the calories and nutrients from that food (since they are more efficient) than the gut bacteria from fat people. This makes no sense since it is well documented that slim people can eat more food and not gain weight than fat people can.
This only stands to reason that the gut bacteria from FAT people extract more nutrients from food and are more efficient, extracting more calories from that food, thus leading to needing less food before the fat people become, well, fat....
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Sodas are bad for you because they contain ~32 grams of sugar per 12 oz can
Dr Pepper Ten has less than one-tenth of that. I drink diet soda because it's cheaper than prescription stimulant or NRI medication.
So if I cut open a skinny person and eat their entrails, I will lose weight?
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
Is fatness a sign of inefficiency or efficiency?
If I went back 50 thousand years and saw two guys... a fat guy and a skinny guy... which would I assume was more prosperous? The association of fatness with poverty, ill health, etc is a modern association born of our great resources.
A man that needed 10,000 calories a day simply to survive could live in our society rather easily. However, 50,000 years ago he'd be a dead man.
Today, the standard of health is not what it was in our genetic past. That is not to say that the standard is wrong or that people that are skinny are TODAY healthier. However, implying that the fat people have less efficient digestive systems implies that somehow people are getting fat while extracting less from their food. Well... how did they get fat then?
Its possible I'm reading the wrong things into this and they're implying that the fat people NEED to eat more to get their base nutrition which leaves them with excess empty calories which leads to obesity. However, the experiment said they fed both sets of mice the same food. Which means Mouse 1 got fat on food X and Mouse 2 did not. Well where did those extra calories the skinny mouse got go if not into fat? Me thinks the little stinker pooped them out which doesn't seem like efficiency.
Possibly the solution here is to have a LESS efficient digestive system. Lots of dieting drugs effectively do that. I think there was one that made it hard for people to metabolize fat. It worked apparently... but had the unfortunate side effect of causing people to lose bowl control as an oily mess exploded from their rectums. I tried to put that both accurately and maturely... but... its not easy.
Look, I'm just pointing out the logical incongruity here of saying that a more efficient digestive system leads to a skinny mouse. That makes no sense.
In any case, great research... I await the bacterial transplants that will let us all eat like pigs while still looking smoking in our bathing suits.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Heard it on radio last year, not news. Also, gut bacteria is responsible for serotonine production (depression and food could be related)
Tomorrow is another day...
No, I am not getting fecal transplant. Thank you.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Great news! I can blame it on the bacteria!
Because I thought I was fat from eating calorie-laden, fat-riddled, corporate-processed junk food and sitting on my ass all day.
the last few years, with good reason.
Medical intervention with antibiotics kills-off intestinal flora, and antibiotic levels in foods have risen over the last decade.
The surface area of the digestive tract is around the size of 2/3rds a tennis court. This is an interface that has barely been studied, and most of the immune system in the form of the lymphatic system nodes is down there.
It is a fact that fecal transplants have had a remarkable impact on the health of recipients that faced chronic illness. Once people get over all the potty humor and attempt some serious objectivity, it becomes very clear that intestinal flora is VERY significant.
This study calls into question some long held assumptions about diet, weight, and the additives we put in our foods. This is really just the beginning of a new era in medicine, hopefully big industry and special interests won't fuck it up too badly.