Study: Body Weight Heavily Influenced By Heritable Gut Microbes

FirephoxRising writes Our genetic makeup influences whether we are fat or thin by shaping which types of microbes thrive in our body, according to a new study. Scientists identified a specific, little known bacterial family that is highly heritable and more common in individuals with low body weight. So we are what we eat, and what we got from out parents. From the article: "The study, funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH), researchers sequenced the genes of microbes found in more than 1,000 fecal samples from 416 pairs of twins. The abundances of specific types of microbes were found to be more similar in identical twins, who share 100 per cent of their genes, than in non-identical twins, who share on average only half of the genes that vary between people. These findings demonstrate that genes influence the composition of gut microbes."

Comments

Oh no

[AmiMoJo]

Here we go, endless posts about how it's all down to pure willpower and entirely the fault of the individual. Maybe we could try looking for more practical solutions and simply berating people this time?

Re:Oh no

[orasio]

That's what is being done nowadays, counting calories.

The problem is that calorie consumption is not constant. It's more like household economy.

If you earn (eat) a lot every day, you will probably end up with a lot of savings (belly fat).

One way of getting rid of those savings (belly fat) is taking a lower paying job (dieting). The problem is that your savings don't magically dissappear, and you can make changes that allow you to keep your savings (fat), even with a lower income (daily calorie intake).

Another way you can get rid of your savings is just spending more daily (like exercise). The problem is that, if you have a good enough income (daily intake), and sizable savings, you will only lose capital (weight) in the long run, no sizable short term effect.

So, a fat person body works, in what respects to calories, like a financially savvy household. Going skinny would be like going broke. Some of us could benefit from a way to teach our bodies to do a bit worse in the calorie finance department. Could be a lot easier than just dieting, exercising or both.

Re:Oh no

[daremonai]

There's actually been serious study of this, and it really is tied to potential for weight gain/loss. Here's one recent summary: Energy-balance studies reveal associations between gut microbes, caloric load, and nutrient absorption in humans.

Re:Oh no

[BradleyUffner]

At the calorie level they are EXACTLY identical. Those foods are only different in the WAY they are turned in to calories. A Calorie is just a measure of energy.

Re:Oh no

[transporter_ii]

You can turn genes on and off with diet and lifestyle. Check out the field of epigenetics. Genes are influencers, but your fate is not written in stone because of them.

See: http://www.livescience.com/418...

The types of bacteria in your gut today may be different tomorrow, depending on what kinds of food you eat, a new study suggests.

Re:Oh no

[beelsebob]

To a certain extent, that's meaningless. Those calories are bound up in a way that you can't use them--which is why they're waste). It may be that there are some usable calories in there if you went back and ingested them again, but obviously there are significantly diminishing returns.

Of course it's not meaningless. Those calories are energy. If I ingest 1800 calories, and burn 1400, but poop out 400, I will maintain my weight, despite not burning as many calories as I ingested. If I have gut bacteria that break down certain long chain sugars so that that I can now ingest them, I will instead only poop out 200, and start gaining weight, despite eating the same thing, and doing the same amount of exercise.

The point here is not really that the solution to my weight gain in that situation is either eat 200 calories less, or do 200 calories more work (or some combination of the above), it absolutely is.

Instead, it's that there's a large part of the world out there that will eat the exact same food, and do the exact same exercise, and maintain or loose weight, because their gut bacteria is not the same. These people (as the person at the root of this thread said) are very likely to sit there screaming that all these "fatties" are just gobbling up donuts, and that's why they're fat. Instead, some of them are actually doing more, and eating less already, but will still gain weight by doing that.

Basically, these studies don't change the correct approach to maintaining weight - but what they do do is highlight that people should be a bit more sensitive to each other, and stop assuming that anyone who gains weight is eating a lot, or exercising a little. There are more factors than those alone.

Re:Oh no

[doug141]

Food calorie content is commonly measured in a bomb calorimeter, using a energy-release process totally different from the human body, and in some cases giving very different values. For example, Olestra releases calories in a bomb calorimeter, but not in the body. Same with sawdust, or "microcrystalline cellulose" as the fast-food places call it.

Re:Oh no

[AK Marc]

I knew a guy that ate so few calories that he was malnutritioned. He also didn't lose weight. The less he ate, the more efficient his digestion and metabolism got. His energy levels dropped, reducing activity levels, and he maintained weight. "Eat less" is not always the answer. In fact, it's not even usually the answer. Anyone who says it is, is just proving they don't understand the question.

Diet causes change in those microbes

[trout007]

The microbs thrive in different environments. I went from a standard american diet to something more high fat low simple carbs diet with lots of fermented foods. Not only did I lose a bunch of weight but most digestive, allergy, and skin problems went away as well. I think there was something about the microbial environment that a high sugar diet caused that was giving me trouble.

Re:Diet causes change in those microbes

[Derec01]

Diet doesn't really change the microbes.

That is not what recent science indicates at all.

"Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome", Nature 505, 559–563 (23 January 2014) doi:10.1038/nature12820
http://www.nature.com/nature/j...

"Here we show that the short-term consumption of diets composed entirely of animal or plant products alters microbial community structure and overwhelms inter-individual differences in microbial gene expression. "

Re:Remember, I'm not a real scientist

[mwvdlee]

I think "-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview" is entirely valid in this case.