Slashdot Mirror
Microbiome Changes Drive the Dieting Yo-Yo Effect, Study Finds (smh.com.au)
wheelbarrio writes: We've known for a long time that diet-induced weight loss is rarely permanent but until now what has been a frustration for dieters has also been largely a mystery to scientists. A paper published today in the prestigious journal Nature presents good evidence that your gut microbiome may be to blame. Studying mice fed cycles of high-fat and normal diets, the authors found that the particular bacterial population that thrives in the high-fat regime persists in the gut even once the mice have returned to normal weight and normal metabolic function after a dieting cycle. This leaves them more susceptible to weight gain than control mice who were never overweight, when both populations are exposed to a cycle of high-fat diet. The details are fascinating, including the suggestion that dietary flavonoid supplementation might mitigate the effect. My guess is that this may end up being one of the most cited papers of the year, if not the decade.
Who would have guessed.
My guess is that this may end up being one of the most cited papers of the year, if not the decade.
Not if the food processing industry has anything to say about it.
Use your superior willpower to starve to death.
This might explain why some recipients of FMT for treatment of C. diff. and CU have seen weight gain without changing their diets.
I feel so sig.
Let's write a paper and try to push sales up a bit.
Sorry for being so cynical but that's how this industry operates most of the time.
Yep, touched a nerve
You're missing the point. This is about explaining why the same amount of food (or energy) intake affects people differently. Research into metabolic syndrome has shown that there is no simple relation: eat less -> lose weight -> get healthy. Once you know what influences weight gain or loss, given a certain amount of food intake you can adjust for other parameters.
I feel so sig.
diet: "way of living, mode of life". A temporary regime can be useful to recover from an illness; it doesn't permanently change the size or contents of your gut if it doesn't persist. But of course we've always known that.
People can't lose weight because they have no willpower and/or are too lazy to exercise. All other excuses are BS and for anyone who comes along and mewls that they just can't lose weight no matter what they do I just ask them to go and point out where the fatties are standing in the background of those news reports from famine hit areas. Quite.
You're missing the point. This is about explaining why the same amount of food (or energy) intake affects people differently. Research into metabolic syndrome has shown that there is no simple relation: eat less -> lose weight -> get healthy. Once you know what influences weight gain or loss, given a certain amount of food intake you can adjust for other parameters.
Absolute nonsense. From the Sunday Morning Herald summary (I don't have a Nature subscription):
They found that the gut microbiomes of the mice who lost weight were altered, and that these changes remained in place for many months and contributed to rapid and excessive weight gain if the mice were given high-fat diets again.
So the mice gained weight when they were fed a crap diet. And, quelle surprise, when human porkers give up their short-lived attempts to stick to a Mediterranean diet and shove their noses back in the McDonald's trough, they pile back on the pounds.
Neither article says that the mice had a calorie-controlled diet. It seem far more likely that the gut microbiome changes have an impact on appetite.
But in further analysis of the microbiome, they found that among key changes were [] reduced energy expenditure.
Why would you ever go on a diet without exercise? Isn't it common knowledge that you have to raise your metabolic rate?
the authors found that the particular bacterial population that thrives in the high-fat regime persists in the gut even once the mice have returned to normal weight and normal metabolic function after a dieting cycle. This leaves them more susceptible to weight gain
Because this is why people get fat. From eating fat. In other news, eating sugar causes diabetes.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
All this has very litle to do with willpower; that is the crux of the matter! I was in that situation with sugar some years ago. I got shakes, weakness and irregular hearth beat if I did not eat [plenty of] sugar. I knew it was bad, I knew I was too heavy, I knew it all - and it did not make any difference.
No one can fight their own biochemistry - you only have to pray it does not turn against you. It took me 2-3 years for the gut bugs to balance [more or less] and to [mostly] stop making me crave the carbs....true it was easier and easier with time but it was absolutely herrendous in the beggining. I repeat again with all sicerity - all this has very little to do with willpower.
It doesn't matter WHY it affects them differently, except as trivia.
Unless you intend to specifically analyse, combat and treat individual microbiomes in the stomach of every patient, you're not going to be able to do much else.
And, honestly, it STILL comes down to "YOU need to eat less". Short of individually tailored micromanagement of your gut, you're not going to ever really change what's in there.
And yet, eating less will force the gut bacteria that are less efficient to die off and more efficient ones to survive or be introduced. It's horrible, yes, but still the only way to lose weight is to EAT LESS.
The only possible use for such high-tech analysis? People who risk malnutrition through serious stomach disorders that mean it's otherwise impossible to lose weight without dying. And those people are INCREDIBLY rare.
People make excuses as much as they like, blame your parents, your upbringing, your fear of sticky food, your gut bacteria or whatever. If you want to lose weight you have to eat less and exercise more, and there's no way around that that a non-outlier person can achieve.
The fun part is, two identical people, with different gut bacteria - exhibit different willpower.
There is a whole emerging field about how bacteria communicate with the human and modify aspects of biochemistry and perhaps behaviour to favour their propagation.
I wholeheartedly think these studies are a scam to get further government grants in order for the creators to do nothing, repeat the process and live off the money. /tinfoilhat
Seriously, when will there be papers released with actual definitive proof and not some hypothesis that will probably be debunked by another soon enough?
Most of the this is simple crap is done by fat shamers who want to feel like they are a better person due to the lack of excess fat.
I have lost 50lbs and kept it off for over 3 years myself but it is hard, very hard to do. It was akin to getting my masters degree while working full time hard.
If you eat less you feel more hungry then when you get some food you will over eat.
When you start to exercise you get sore and hungry making you want to just sit and eat.
If you substitute your diet you are often not getting the nutrients you need causing you to feel out of sorts.
It isn't will power to not eat from the candy bowl, but to fight your most primal instinct for a long period. It takes a lot of hard work planning to do it. Any small factor could derail you at any time catching an illness, changing jobs, birth or death in the family.
Diet science has been pathetic because so much of us fall on the simple plan. With Diet food companies sell their plastic food as diet, where they are designed to fit this simple plan and cause us to fail.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
speaks for locally known trusteries? cease fire stand down.. spirit of creation (all of us) provides more than enough of everything we need without any personal gain motive.. thank mom
"Unless you intend to specifically analyse, combat and treat individual microbiomes in the stomach of every patient"
That's exactly where treatment is heading.
Personalised medicine is a huge emerging field and makes an awful lot of sense once you think about it.
Best comment in the thread.
Even the association between activity and body weight is not conclusive. Are people active because they are slim or slim because they are active? On a population level it is difficult to determine.
This Horizon program from the BBC is excellent viewing for those interested in such things.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cywtq
Make your heart beat to shave and a haircut!
OH, you CAN'T? Are you noty in control? Is it your heart or not?
On a hunch I decided to see if there's a correlation between obesity and antibiotics (which are known to kill both the good and bad types of gut bacteria)
Here's a map showing antibiotic prescribing rates.
http://www.cdc.gov/getsmart/co...
Here's a map showing obesity rates:
https://www.maxmasnick.com/med...
Correlation is not causation, but in my unprofessional opinion, these maps look eerily similar.
The only thing this says is that the mice whose gut bacteria had evolved to eat a high fat diet, when exposed to that diet again more efficiently processed the food into energy than mice not previously exposed to that diet. It isn't really about the diet being crap or healthy.
What this study seems to say is the opposite of the conclusion many are taking away from it. If you are more efficient at metabolizing certain foods you need to eat less of them. Period.
You know, calories are not the only thing you take from food. You can eat and metabolize tons of calories and still be hungry and suffer from malnutrition. The fact that you gain more energy from the same amount of food does not mean your body got everything it needed from that food.
I have little doubt that you will be correct about this paper ending up cited a lot.
You can decide whether to eat and what foods to eat. Your argument is akin to claiming that cheating on your wife isn't your fault because -biology.
It doesn't matter WHY it affects them differently, except as trivia.
You haven't followed research into metabolic syndrome and the microbiome in the last decade and a half or so I presume? "Why" is the most important question when it comes to IBD and metabolic syndrome, because there doesn't appear to be a simple deterministic correlation. People react differently to the same kind of food intake while on the same activity level.
Unless you intend to specifically analyse, combat and treat individual microbiomes in the stomach of every patient, you're not going to be able to do much else.
That's exactly the point of this kind of research..
I feel so sig.
You made the GPs point better than they did...
So the mice gained weight when they were fed a crap diet. And, quelle surprise, when human porkers give up their short-lived attempts to stick to a Mediterranean diet and shove their noses back in the McDonald's trough, they pile back on the pounds.
Neither article says that the mice had a calorie-controlled diet. It seem far more likely that the gut microbiome changes have an impact on appetite.
You obviously didn't read the article you quoted.
"To test whether it was due to the microbiome, the researchers transferred the altered microbiomes into mice that had not previously been exposed to yo-yo diets - and here too they found unusually rapid and excessive weight gain when the mice were given high-fat foods."
The amount of weight gained on a given diet depended on the gut biome of the mouse more than the calorific content of their diet.
The only thing this says is that the mice whose gut bacteria had evolved to eat a high fat diet, when exposed to that diet again more efficiently processed the food into energy than mice not previously exposed to that diet. It isn't really about the diet being crap or healthy. What this study seems to say is the opposite of the conclusion many are taking away from it. If you are more efficient at metabolizing certain foods you need to eat less of them. Period.
Ironically, the takeaway that our fast food overlords will get from this is to try and incorporate "flavonoid supplication" into their products in order to stop killing their customer base through obesity. If you are more efficient at processing addictive cheap fast food, you'll be around longer as a paying customer.
Eating less fast food has far more to do with marketing than actually feeling full. No one stops in the middle of a Super-sized triple-decker McShitburger "happy" meal just because they feel full. Not when there's still 2 pounds of french fries left.
Yes, anyone can freely choose to feel tired and hungry all the time or to eat and be overweight but feel fine.
Troll was rated Troll because he trolled (yes, he touched a nerve - but that's part of trolling).
The underlying premise of the article is your gut is an extension of your neural and hormonal systems. Change its ecosystem's chemistry, and you'd think better and eat better. Have more fruit and vegetables, and your health will improve in a non-linear fashion - more than can be explained by better nutrition alone.
I got shakes
Be careful, they are also full of carbs...
-- Make America hate again!
All this has very litle to do with willpower
Two to three years of fighting a basal instinct to eat more sugar caused by biochemistry... That sounds like willpower to me and a hefty dose of it at that.
I was overweight and it was a shameful thing. I believe you that it was difficult but in the end what you did strikes me as entirely the result of willpower. I went from 220 to 150 lbs myself, so a similar range. What I found eventually is the following and I don't see why it wouldn't work for anyone else: a good blender (not a juicer) and a ton of frozen leafy greens along with some frozen blackberry, blueberry type fruit helps enormously. Fills you up with nutrient dense calorie lacking food. That along with sardines and canned salmon to balance out all the red meat (omega 3/6 ratio) I eat and then occational body weight and barbell exercises mostly just to keep testosterone up. I try to avoid bread and absolutely any drinks that are sweetened artificial or otherwise. Pretty much just coffee and water. It is easier to crowd out bad food than simply stop eating it but in the end I still needed to re-learn that hunger isn't a bad thing.
I dropped the weight taking the more extreme approach initially, eating almost all hamburger and steak for a few years and doing barbell exercises like crazy but... I think I almost gave myself scurvy so while it worked great I wouldn't recommend that.
[citation needed]
Yeah, it is not simple thermodynamics. The complexity of the interactions in the body is overwhelmingly mind-boggling.
Interestingly enough, more and more researchers are buying into the lower-carb side of the diet controversy. And it seems that if you lower the amount of carbohydrates in your diet, you probably have to increase your fat intake to get enough energy to prevent starvation responses. And a gut that is adapted to burning fat for energy is significantly different from a gut that burns sugars. And so on....
However, the report of a single study doesn't provide a prescription for health. Some time ago there was good discussion about creating a comprehensive science database to compare outcomes of different research. This database would report on both successful and unsuccessful experiments and research, which could possibly cut down on instances of "fads" by identifying what works, what doesn't work, and what hasn't been tested yet.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
This is a slashvertisement for whatever upcoming "flavonoid supplement" this outfit is about to come out with.
Steve Jobs is dead because he lacked the willpower to live.
Sorry you missed the subtlety of the absurd. Let me elaborate.
"Hillary should have won the election because she won the Slashdot poll."
The typical concept of a "diet" (as in, temporarily changing how/what/how much you eat) is the problem here ... if you eat "a" and are fat, then eat "b" for a while to lose weight, and once you do go back to eating "a", why would you expect anything else than regaining the weight? People need to stop the concept of a diet, and instead change the way and what they eat ... there are enough studies and science around food to show that meats, sugars, fat, processed foods etc are the cause for overweight and obesity, and by changing to more nutritional-value based foods not only the body loses weight, but many other civilization sicknesses are prevented or at least greatly reduced ...
Well if it would be true (which would be extremely weird that none of the countless calorie control studies on humans had found before) then it is revolutionary.
That two healthy humans can have the same input and output but still put on different weight would indeed be a game changer. However I just don't see how this can be the case for any practical difference considering that this has been tested multiple times in clinical studies.
I'm thinking that it's either:
A) over reaction, aka the result is real but has no practical effect on the human body
B) incorrect conclusion, a bad study
C) a fluke, not reproducible
OK, you have a point so I will tell the secret....the will power came from a source that is unavailable to most cases. You see one of the side effects of my severely misbalanced gut was that enormous amount of particular type of bug had taken over half of the living space. The buggers then found their way into my bladder and from there you know where it goes. So I was suffering from chronic bladder/urethra infection that was unbeatable by any means until it was realized where the source of the problem is.
So, apart from being fat and underpowered I was also having serious trouble with sex [it would simply hurt rather than being a pleasure]. Now for a guy in his late thirties this is one HELL of a motivation! So when the doctor said 'I will make it so that this chronic infection will go away IF YOU EAT what I tell you and you do it seriously" I was like "I'll do anything to be fully functional male again ,anything!".
On the other hand of the spectrum one of my nieces, age 11 who ran into the obesity issue years ago. Being a child she has less of a discipline, willpower and motivation. On top of that in venerable mind as hers [and that of every girl and also boy of this age] the desire to get slimmer turns counterproductive especially if bullying occurs both at school and outside. The girl tries so hard but struggling with the bugs and struggling with society and your own mind proves extremely difficult.
Thus i do not consider my story a showcase for willpower - maybe I don't give myself enough credit but there it is....
I have written many /. posts over the last few years about this. I am still astounished of how much influence those bugs exert on us [although as someone who has studied biochemistry and microbiology, but never made a career in it, I should have known better].
when exposed to that diet again more efficiently processed the food into energy than mice not previously exposed to that diet. It isn't really about the diet being crap or healthy.
The second sentence seems to contradict the first one? If it's bad for you, then that's what "crap diet" means.
Ezekiel 23:20
Short of individually tailored micromanagement of your gut, you're not going to ever really change what's in there.
Simple gut bacteria "transfusions" (literally putting poop in a pill) from a thin person have worked before. (Even the reverse by accident has caused weight gain!)
...Personalised medicine is a huge emerging field and makes an awful lot of sense once you think about it.
That depends on if anyone can actually afford it.
Nothing like holding your cure over your head for the right price, which of course will be dictated by millionaires demanding to become billionaires.
The only thing that "makes an awful lot of sense" here is understanding that medicine creates massive profits and isn't getting any cheaper for anyone, no matter who propagates bullshit to the masses to claim otherwise.
Hey, I have a similar, transient I hope, problem. I suddenly have heart palpitations, cravings for sweet foods, mood problems, dizziness and other symptoms of Type 2 D. but I don't have Type 2 D., just a very poorly controlled blood sugar - and it all started suddenly after a bad viral infection. I emphasize viral, because I didn't use antibiotics. Still, I guess my microbiota have suffered somehow, because in addition to the poor sugar control I also have regular stomach pain.
My doctor and I are desperately trying to diagnose what the fuck is going on, but maybe you could contribute/help by sharing more information? At least regarding the re-balancing of your microbiota - what did you do, how did you figure things are back to normal, etc.?
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
A lot of people do sports in a serious and committed manner but only a small % of them make it big. All those millions of other extremely fit people with the right microbiome will be great donors for health enhancing poop transplants.
I can't wait for people to be discussing their transplants in the same enthusiastic manner that bodybuilders talk about their supplements.
Diets that involve certain types of foods have not worked for me. Not that I am overweight by any large amount, I was just about 30 lbs more than me being at what most would consider skinny. I have been doing Intermittent fasting, which is significantly easier for me. While losing weight, about 2 Lbs a week, I eat 1 meal a day (Dinner) with very few limits on how much or what I eat during this meal. This lifestyle change was significantly easier to cope with than changing what I eat. By the time I hit the 24 hour mark my stomach seems to have shrunk so it doesn't take that much to make me full and eating a full days worth of calories would be difficult for me in one meal. I realize this is not the case for everyone. It was strange for the first couple days doing this, but my body adjusted to not expecting the food throughout the day and hunger pains went down significantly. Now that I am back to a reasonable weight I work out and do 2 meals a day which may be giving me a few too many calories, but If I notice any weight gain I can always do a couple of one meal days per week and not feel like I am the dieting rollercoaster. There are a few websites and books out there that claim it is healthy, but I am very skeptical of most all nutritional science one way or the other. My energy levels seemed OK in the dieting phase, but I am usually more physically active in the morning than in the afternoon. I'm not sure how it would go If I worked out just prior to dinner.
This is simply not true. About 20 years ago, I lost the ability to walk. (Also sit, stand, etc.) I gained a lot of weight.
Three years ago, I was put on an exercise regime that made it so that I can walk again. It is very intense - so intense that I get tendonitis of my joints once ever few months (and they don't let me stop exercising then either...).
I have not lost any weight at all. I look better, and obviously feel better, but my mass is more, not less.
while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
So would killing off your gut bacteria and then replacing them be effective? Probably the opposite is also true that antibiotics are often responsible for gut bacteria imbalances in the first place, but at some point would it be most effective to just wipe the slate clean and then 24 hours later take a pill to reestablish your gut bacteria?
I agree with you entirely, but it's a separate argument. It's similar to reflecting on whether scientists should undertake certain types of research. The media loves to ham these arguments up with a "should we study this?" style of reporting. All along, however, such decisions have always been social/political and are entirely separate to whether we should know something or not.
So yes, we should find out whether personalised medicine works and if so, how much more effective it is. Then, as a society, we should choose whether it is worthwhile or not. As it stands, this process happens all the time in medicine at the moment with all kinds of treatments being unavailable due to economic justification. I'm not arguing for any single one either way, but I do think it is important to do.
Of course, if we're going to go off on a tangent, you may want to reflect on the health care system in the US. The actual system there is the fundamental problem with your poor health care (see infant mortality figures) and exorbitant costs. I'm not saying that anywhere else in the world is perfect, but when you're coming last, it makes sense to at least imitate some things from those in front.
I recommend this movie as a good starting point. Love or hate the guy, in my experience he's certainly worth listening to.
I'm a bit late to the party and please note that this observation is based on a sample size of one, so take that with a spoonful of salt, however:
I've tried a few things to lose weight and I'm now below 90kg. I started at 116kg about 6 or 7 years ago. I first lost 23kg by changing my diet to less carbohydrates and more veggies and salad (where I previously ate none). I was out of a job at that time.
This diet was assisted by a doctor and I was forbidden from doing much sports.
After I got a job and relaxed on my diet regime, I gained another 10kg. I stayed at around 103 kg for quite a bit. Perhaps a year ago, I started chewing my food better and thus ate much less food. I lost weight to the point of weighing about 96kg.
Then came another tough time with the kids and I tried keeping spirits up with carbohydrates, so I remained at 96 for another while.
In last two or three months I went down to 88.8. Again by just eating less.
During the last three years, I had a brutal bout of ulcerative colitis and spent two weeks in the hospital with a blocked colon where I couldn't keep down any food for about ten days.
I weighed about 82 kg when I left the hospital but due to my lack of strength, just about all the weight lost was muscle mass, not fat. I was back on my normal weight a few weeks later.
Now my theory is this: Even though I never wanted to believe it, eating less calories than you actually burn during the day plain does work. There are two caveats though:
Without actually measuring your level of activity and your muscle mass it is a bit hard to define what your daily needs actually are.
And second, and much more important, if you suffer from depression and stress, you are much, much more likely to have to wage a HUGE internal battle with yourself to actually keep to your diet. And when you almost inevitably fail to adhere to your diet on an especially hard day, you're WAY more likely to think yourself a failure and eat too much the next day as well or even give up on the diet altogether.
And since you already failed, in your mind, you'll fall back on the carbohydrates to boost your mental stability again.
I believe, much like with every addiction, that this is primarily a mental issue. Which makes it all the harder to overcome. It's not easy being in a mentally stable state when your overweight contributes to your depression.
Multiplex microbial assays are becoming less expensive, and computer analysis is always going down. Sure, at first it'll just be the wealthy, but once the techniques are proven what insurance company or employer wouldn't want to help their covered individuals to be healthier? The comorbidities for obesity are not unknown.
No one stops in the middle of a Super-sized triple-decker McShitburger "happy" meal just because they feel full. Not when there's still 2 pounds of french fries left.
Are you spying on me?
Cheap storage VM.
Most of the this is simple crap is done by fat shamers who want to feel like they are a better person due to the lack of excess fat.
Assholes gonna ass. Fat shamers are assholes, plain and simple. On the other hand, I've seen people discussing the medical ffects of fat described as fat shamers. But yeah people get super self-righteous about it.
If you substitute your diet you are often not getting the nutrients you need causing you to feel out of sorts.
That should be fixable: you shouldn't be short on nutrients. I'm assuming you're referring to everything which isn't calories.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Never trust science reporting. Here's a better source, the summary of the paper that was linked to:
Here, we identify an intestinal microbiome signature that persists after successful dieting of obese mice, which contributes to faster weight regain and metabolic aberrations upon re-exposure to obesity-promoting conditions and transmits the accelerated weight regain phenotype upon inter-animal transfer.
In other words, once a mouse has this microbiome signature they are more susceptible to obesity, i.e. it is harder for people who were once obese to remain at normal weight than for someone who was never obese.
Other studies have shown that once people become obese and start dieting their bodies go into a kind of starvation mode, where they need to keep calorie consumption down below normal levels to maintain their weight. In fact for people who were obese (not just overweight) it can be so bad that the number of calories they need to take in can be below the level at which normal western food can supply enough nutrition.
Of course this can be offset by doing a lot of exercise, but realistically people can't go for a long run every day or spend an hour on the exercise bike, especially as they get older and are probably already dealing with damaged joints from being too heavy.
So if we can find a way to reset that, perhaps by transferring the microbiome from one person to another, we can help people recover and stay at a healthy weight. I imagine it will be more effective than just berating them for being weak minded, at any rate.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
This is Slashdot, there are a lot of fat people here that want to blame it on science instead of their lack of healthy eating and exercise.
Yes, anyone can freely choose to feel tired and hungry all the time or to eat and be overweight but feel fine.
As someone who's recently lost some weight, no, that's not right. You shouldn't be going at it so hard that you feel tired all the time. If you do, you're either trying to lose weight too fast, or there's something not optimal about what you're eating.
I found that even before I lost weight, eating high GI foods led to a nice full feeling followd by a carb crash where I'd feel sleepy, which I usually solved by guzzling coffee. Switching to less easily digestible stuff helped a great deal, though I still guzzle coffee, just not quite as much.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I think something touched your nerves.
Reality is a slackware box running on a 386 tucked away in god's sock drawer.
Yeah, it is not simple thermodynamics.
And anyone who claims that it is didn't pay attention during Thermodynamics or take an actual course in it rather than just what they barely retained from high school physics. The real formula is way more complex than input = output.
I keep hearing about how bad the American heath system is, yet I keep seeing People coming here to have procedures done that they can't get back home in a timely fashion or at all.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Eating less fast food has far more to do with marketing than actually feeling full. No one stops in the middle of a Super-sized triple-decker McShitburger "happy" meal just because they feel full. Not when there's still 2 pounds of french fries left.
I almost never feel full. I don't know if it's my biome, my genome, my upbringing, or what. I always feel like I could eat more. As a teen and 20 something when I could eat unlimited amounts of crap and not gain weight, I would be one of those eating 5 or 6 plates of food from an all you can eat-buffet.
As I hit my 30's I began to gain weight so had to start watching what I eat. I'm always hungry, I always feel like I could eat more, but I limit what I eat to stay healthy. Some of us, myself included, never feel full. It takes a huge amount of willpower for me to not overeat and maintain a healthy weight. I fully sympathise with those who do get huge because they have large appetites. It would certainly be very easy to let go and just pig out rather than be hungry all the time, like I am.
Many people who are overweight aren't so because they continued eating after they felt full, they just don't feel full.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
This comment should be the most cited dietary paper of the decade.
The OP paper just found that someone with a shit diet that enables them to turn into a fatty. Turns into fatty again when they return to the shit diet. Good fucking job stating the obvious.
Is this the same as your guess that Trump supporters are racist and fascist and Trump would not win?
Well he was two thirds right at least.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
TFA article mentions that transferring the microbiome from one animal to another also transferred the more rapid weight gain, so it seems likely that some kind of transfer or selective... microbiomicide? could be used to treat patients.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Eating less fast food has far more to do with marketing than actually feeling full. No one stops in the middle of a Super-sized triple-decker McShitburger "happy" meal just because they feel full. Not when there's still 2 pounds of french fries left.
I almost never feel full. I don't know if it's my biome, my genome, my upbringing, or what. I always feel like I could eat more. As a teen and 20 something when I could eat unlimited amounts of crap and not gain weight, I would be one of those eating 5 or 6 plates of food from an all you can eat-buffet.
As I hit my 30's I began to gain weight so had to start watching what I eat. I'm always hungry, I always feel like I could eat more, but I limit what I eat to stay healthy. Some of us, myself included, never feel full. It takes a huge amount of willpower for me to not overeat and maintain a healthy weight. I fully sympathise with those who do get huge because they have large appetites. It would certainly be very easy to let go and just pig out rather than be hungry all the time, like I am.
Many people who are overweight aren't so because they continued eating after they felt full, they just don't feel full.
I am the same way. I played sports daily as a kid and college student and would literally eat all day. I do find that certain foods make me feel full - but never for long. I go from full to famished in about an hour. I basically starve myself all morning because, if I ate breakfast at home, I'd eat breakfast two more times in the office before an early lunch. Exercising on a daily basis causes me to increase my intake to 4-5000 calories a day. It's all a game of self control.
You are full of it.
.
.25 of a mile some double the previous distance. I did that for 2 months even in the cold of winter.
.25 of a mile ride, I decide that I would get serious about this and start riding every day to work. Here is a few picture of me for the first couple of months riding to work... http://wiki.xkcd.com/geohashin... Notice the drastic weight loss. The weight loss was not intentional, it was just a side effect
It is your choice to be unhealthy. YOU and only YOU choose what to eat and how much. It is your choice not to exercise. Boo F'n Hoo you feel a little pain.
Now I was not obese but I was heavy when I walked into my doctors office some 8 years ago suffering from the flu. My doctor took my blood pressure at 160 over 110 and told me that he wanted me to start taking blood pressure medication or I would die from a heart attack in 6 months. I told the doctor that I was not going to start taking pills every day and I was going to do something about it.
My doctor asked what could I do on my own. I said "I don't know but I am going to do something."
I had a bicycle in my garage and thought I would do that. I started out only riding to the end of my street some 150 yards and back every day. It only took a minute or so do ride that. That was it. If you can't ride a bicycle 150 yards, you need to give up on life now. Was it painful? Hell yes it was, but I was rolling the clock back on that heart attack in 6 months. I discovered what I call vitamin N, "naproxen sodium" or Aleve https://www.aleve.com/. Take some. Deal with the pain.
I did that for a month and it became easy. Easy as in I was not sweating profusely and out of breath. So, for the next month, I rode to the end of the subdivision for a total of
After that became easy as in not as painful as when I started the
Was it painful...?? Hell yes it was. I made a choice to do that and stuck with it through the pain.... Well also taking plenty of Vitamin N.
I've continued to ride though the years and now ride 5,000 miles a year. As of this writing I am short by 117 miles... https://www.lovetoride.net/atl...
You want to know what keeps me doing it? I now can do things that kids half my age can't do and I am 51. I went out for a ride with a bicycle shop to get in some extra miles this summer. 56 people signed up for the ride and I out rode everyone of them... https://connect.garmin.com/mod...
I own the second fastest time of everyone who as ever recorded a ride of the Alpharetta Greenway here in Atlanta Georgia... https://connect.garmin.com/mod...
In my current job I have only driven to work 5 times since I have started working here almost 9 months ago. I drive only due to heavy rain. I didn't drive to work this morning only because it is raining here this morning. The first day we have had rain in 47 days. But here is yesterdays ride to work... https://connect.garmin.com/mod...
It is faster to ride a bicycle to work now than it is to drive here in rush hour traffic.
I don't want to listen to any excuses any more from fat people saying it isn't their fault. I've been there, it was my fault that I was fat. It was my fault that I was doing nothing about it.
Now it isn't my fault that I can out ride almost everyone in Georgia. Notice me in 8th place... https://nationalbikechallenge.... Notice me in 593rd place of everyone in the country... https://nationalbikechallenge....
There is a big problem with that quote... human weight gain is not caused by high dietary fat intake. Carbs aka sugars are less filling and burned faster than dietary fats, complex carbs are promoted like crazy by out of date diets (which includes the 1980's "heart healthy" diet promoted by many doctors) but while burning slower than simple carbs they still are less filling and satiating than fats.
So yeah, that burger from McDonalds is bad but it's the bun, sauces, tomato, fries, and coke are that are the evil bits. Not the fatty burger itself.
Why must one be a "fat shamer" to say it's down to will power as you so aptly describe.
When you have not done it for most of your life it becomes HARDER but if you insist and impose your will not to be a slave to your urges then it gets easier over time.
Think of will power like a muscle. Your biceps cannot curl 50 lbs from day one. You start with 5lbs and increase over time. Yes some people will achieve better results with less effort and less time, you can secretly hate them when you see them but it's still the same thing. EFFORT.
Really? I've heard people who claim we have the best healthcare make claims such as that. I've yet to ever encounter someone who came here for healthcare though. I do know people who have imported things or exported themselves for treatments not offered here or save dramatically on the cost of treatment vs the US though. Including myself, I went to Mexico for dental work at 25% of the cost (which frankly is still an outrageous figure). My dentist tried to discourage me but on my return he reviewed the work and confessed to me that everyone he knows who has gone there for treatment has had excellent work done.
What kind of weird bacteria was that?? Sounds awful.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Don't we all.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Gut bacteria make a huge difference and they adapt to your diet. There are companies working on transplants, so far it's pretty much consuming excrement... It's the only treatment for some diseases, notably some antibiotic resistant ones. Gut bacteria will change what you consume depending on what they consume and they can change how full you feel based on what they give off (gases...).
Antibiotics kill a lot of gut bacteria so they probably have an impact on weight gain and weight loss. They almost certainly reduce the variety of intestinal flora and that is probably a bad thing.
Recent studies show eating fat does not make you fat. The fat gets broken down and used. Eating sugar makes you fat, it gets stored quickly. Drinking soft drinks (even zero cal zero sugar) makes you fat, don't know why, studies are consistent.
Fruits, vegetables, and exercise are all good.
Walking briskly is good exercise. Walking slowly isn't.
If you want to lose weight: weigh yourself often, cut sugar, exercise. Not necessarily fun, but not bad if you can cook and find sports you enjoy, and/or learn to enjoy walking fairly fast and far.
You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
Never trust science reporting. Here's a better source, the summary of the paper that was linked to:
In other words, once a mouse has this microbiome signature they are more susceptible to obesity, i.e. it is harder for people who were once obese to remain at normal weight than for someone who was never obese.
We've been edging toward this knowledge more and more recently. The bacterial content of our guts has fascinated people for a long time. Its even used as treatments, as in fecal matter transplants for C. difficile colitis http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org...
Even as far back as the 1940's Theodor Morell, Old Adolph's physician treated him with intestinal bacteria. And despite everyone thinking it was quackery of the highest order, it appeared to work.
Other studies have shown that once people become obese and start dieting their bodies go into a kind of starvation mode, where they need to keep calorie consumption down below normal levels to maintain their weight. In fact for people who were obese (not just overweight) it can be so bad that the number of calories they need to take in can be below the level at which normal western food can supply enough nutrition.
At my adult lightest, I bicycled 20 miles a day, ran 2 miles a day at lunch time, lifted weights before the bicycle trip home, and ate 1 meal which was estimated around 700 calories. And while I was pretty ripped, there was no way I could keep that up, especially after my son was born and the missus wanted me at the house. So the exercise just became the lunchtime work.
With a surprising amount of weight gain.
So if we can find a way to reset that, perhaps by transferring the microbiome from one person to another, we can help people recover and stay at a healthy weight. I imagine it will be more effective than just berating them for being weak minded, at any rate.
A person can diet and lose weight. It can be difficult, but can be done.
A person who feels the need to act all superior because of weight cannot help but be a gaping asshole - a condition for which there is no cure.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Or, if you're getting fat you could eat less, and if you then get too thin you could eat a bit more, instead trying to design an overly complicated analysis.
They funny thing is when you compare it with the "better" fare at other restaurants, McDonald's, at least calorie wise is lower. Also, you can buy any sized sandwich you want. A hamburger has a 2 ounce patty. A triple quarter pounder has 12 ounces of meat. Why would you by a super sized sandwich and throw half of it away when you could order something smaller.
I would argue that the standard sandwich size is a quarter pound. Most fancy restaurants, their smallest burger start at a half pound. Without a doubt, the McDonald's is lower calorie.
im sorry but you are completely wrong. after going through several acute phases of ulcerative colitis, including a month long hospital stay, i decided to radically alter my diet according to this website:
http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.info/
this book as well, although much later: http://terrywahls.com/about-the-wahls-protocol/
there are simple illegal/legal lists and i followed them. the main gist of it: no processed sugar, no bread, no milk, no starch, as well as a handful of other things. or simply put, just fruit, vegetables,meats along with sources of fat.
i started beginning of april, 2013 and while the first 6 months or so was challenging ( i would have vivid dreams about eating ice cream, for example, which eventually went away), i was well enough after 3 months to travel, which was more of an impact then any medication ever provided, and i went through them all (cortisone(predisone, injected then orally), remicade, salofalk, Tacrolimus(prograf), etc.) and while they saved me from dying, they did not heal me in any way. whenever i thought about eating something i shouldnt, i just thought about the hospital visits, blood loss, etc.
i would also add no doctor ever told me to go on this diet.
now its end of november 2016 and ive been in remission since beginning of august this year. believe it or not, the final piece of the puzzle was to stop swimming. i theorized that the chlorine might be irritating the colon, which kind of makes sense. but again no doctor ever told me this.
while ive started to eat small amounts of starch again, but ill never again touch gluten or lactose or processed sugar, since the cravings are completely gone.
i fought my own biochemistry and i won.
Exactly, complex carbs are better than simple, fats better yet, and proteins best of all.
It's really a very exciting field, lots of potential applications. All frustratingly far off though, for people suffering today. I can see clinics in China and eastern Europe offering this treatment for all sorts of things soon, maybe even pharmacies offering pills online. I suppose the main issue is that the transplant material needs to be somewhat "fresh".
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yes but the idea is to reduce body fat not overall mass. More lean mass is actually helpful as it burns more calories both by being maintained and with every action you take.
It doesn't matter WHY it affects them differently, except as trivia.
Personally, I think an interesting research project might be why self sanctimonious assholes feel that weight is a measurable attribute signifying superiority, and as such ridicule of the obese is only right - when in fact it's a manifestation of insecurity.
Your simple Just eat less and exercise more is a truism, and like all truisms is worthless.
I kept my weight in line with a hellava lot of exercise and eating 1 meal a day. Running, weights, bikes, and Ice Hockey. But it took a hellava lot of each. And much more effort than most people would ever make - including th esuperior people who were slender to start with. I'm pretty efficient in my food processing. Put in a starvation situation, I'll be healthy when the naturally slender people are dead. But as it is, I spend a lot of time exercising a lot of will power. How much? In high school and a few years afterward, I smoked cigarettes. I was up to 4 packs a day. Quitting that was much easier than the daily willpower I need to ignore hunger. You can live without cigarettes, but try going cold turkey on food.
And, honestly, it STILL comes down to "YOU need to eat less". Short of individually tailored micromanagement of your gut, you're not going to ever really change what's in there.
In this matter you are wrong. We already do fecal matter transplants in order to treat C. difficile colitis. There are also an interestingly high number of probiotics available for consumption. And then there is that interesting intestinal biota difference between obese and normal people. The fecal transplants for the colitis issue shows how a change in flora can have positive results. So this matter is valid.
What I find odd in this matter is how some people seem to have a need to castigate those who are not slender, have a deep seated need to call the obese out for their failings - the lack of will power, the weakness inherent in anyone not properly slender, and therefore not equal to the properly slender.
Then couple that with a desire that this intestinal flora thing be bogus, a reaction that seems to indicate a need to ridicule the obese. Perhaps it's time to ridicule people with bad insecurity issues?
Do you want this to not work? What if it does? Will the sanctimonious need to find a new target to deride?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You keep hearing how RICH people come to america to have treatments. Meanwhile the middle class in america are going to mex to get treated because the operation in mex is cheaper than the deductible if done in the US. I hear India is starting to do this as well, and they wrap in a mini vacation with the surgery, all for much less than getting it done in the US. I think the US is now at 12% of GDP for health. That is just crazy. Personalized medicine I could see push it to 20+. It is not sustainable.
So yes, we should find out whether personalised medicine works and if so, how much more effective it is. Then, as a society, we should choose whether it is worthwhile or not.
I've been sold on personalized medicine ever since I went to the hospital for a broken ankle, and they gave me a corneal transplant.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Well, I think eating more fat in a way mimics more how our ancestors might have eaten, because I doubt they had tons of high-carb foods lying around, although some might have eaten tubers like potatoes. And from what I understand you can't get 100% of your calories from protein, as your body needs carbs or fats as a cofactor to utilize protein. I think the paleo diet has some merit as it suggests a low-carb diet but it excludes some things which may be beneficial, like raw dairy.
Most of the this is simple crap is done by fat shamers who want to feel like they are a better person due to the lack of excess fat.
Exactly. Remember though, we can lose weight, but they cannot lose being assholes because it is a terminal condition.
I have lost 50lbs and kept it off for over 3 years myself but it is hard, very hard to do. It was akin to getting my masters degree while working full time hard.
I hear ya brother! Congrats. But it is hard to keep it off, and you find yourself spending a lot more time exercising and avoiding food than the "superior" people. I've been exactly there.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
All true.
But at the end of the day, it's still your body and you're in control.
Or you're not.
Either way, it's still YOU.
Can you avoid being an asshole? At the end of the day, that defines you, and its still YOU.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Personalised medicine is damn expensive. In a world where we can't afford cheap generics for enough people, and still have insurance-backed healthcare (stupidity personified), personalised medicine is an extra cost that can be put on you and penalise you for your genetic makeup further than we ever could before.
Or you could just eat less.
Because we have NOWHERE NEAR an understanding enough to tell people what they should be doing to get their weight down in such instances, without also involving the words "eat less" and "exercise more" along with them.
We haven't even identified most gut bacteria, let alone work out which ones are "wrong", let alone where they came from, let alone what's needed to put them back, and certain NOT how to sustain that situation without changing what the user eats and getting them to ... EAT LESS OF IT to see if it works.
Personalised medicine is fabulous. If you can afford it. There's a reason that we type blood, and check chromosomes and all kinds of other things for your personal response to something (good or bad). And every test costs, whether you pay for it directly or not. And pretty much, in modern healthcare, the emphasis is on reducing the number of tests, not increasing them. Because every failed test costs just as much as every success, which is why you hire clever doctors to know what tests are necessary to eliminate the most things the quickest.
But your dicky belly that's solved by eating less just isn't worth the cost, unless there's a serious underlying medical reason that's going to kill you, rather than a chosen ignorance of eating less to avoid things that will kill you.
You can be overweight on a Mediterranean diet,
You can live on yogurt, parmessian cheese, home made peasant bread, soppresatta, olives, cornichons, salad and wine, never go to fast-food places and still be concerned about excess weight - even if you walk 10,000+ steps a day and go to the gym 4-5 days a week.
I know because the above is my diet and my exercise routine, has been for years, and I'm constantly monitoring my caloric input.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
You can decide whether to eat and what foods to eat. Your argument is akin to claiming that cheating on your wife isn't your fault because -biology.
My, it's good to see that the person with the definitive answer is here on Slashdot. Have you contacted the people doing this study to tell them it's pointless?
And if you seriously believe that little bit of bullshit equating obesity with infidelity, it looks like we got's us some fresh meat here folks!
You challenge is to prove that people of identical weight will be exactly the same given the same amount of food. This should be exceptionally easy since you know.
Now show that what is in your GI tract has absolutely no effect upon the digestion of food. I've been wondering about this one, since those stupid scientists think the intestinal flora play a big part in us actually being alive, since the dumfuks think the bacteria actually perform the digestion functions.
Now show that the difference in gut bacteria between obese and the better among us is not actually different. That it's like global warming hysteria or something.
Fallback position for you: Explain how a difference in biota will categorically have absolutely no difference in digestion properties.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
> I don't know if it's my biome, my genome, my upbringing, or what. I always feel like I could eat more.
I think right there you've identified one difference (apart from bacteria etc). I always *could* eat more too, but I wasn't raised to eat as much as I possibly can. For me, feeling stuffed is unusual and uncomfortable. For me, normal and comfortable is *some* food in my belly. I *could* drive faster, I *could* talk louder, I *could* eat more. I'd categorize my hunger/fullness in three ranges:
Hungry - stomach starts to hurt, feeling the effects of low blood sugar.
Normal - There's some food in my belly. 90% of the time. I'm not noticing my stomach or blood sugar.
Full - yuck, I ate too much. I feel kinda bloated and can't move around as well. I do this maybe once per year.
I'm sure there are several different things that affect weight, but I think that's one of them, and it's probably how different people are raised. I don't talk as loud as I can, I talk at a reasonable, comfortable level, and I was raised to eat the same way. Did your parents tell you to eat everything on your plate? I grew up leaving food on my plate, eating just until I no longer felt that I needed to eat more. I always *could* eat more, but had no reason to stuff myself.
Why all the hate? The struggles that fat people have really aren't hurting you. Oh, unless you are a self-hating fat person.
You must be new here.
Troll was rated Troll because he posted as AC.
Otherwise, he would have been (Score:5, Funny).
>"I go from full to famished in about an hour. "\n Thank you for not leading into a tired joke about Chinese pussy.
Simple gut bacteria "transfusions" (literally putting poop in a pill) from a thin person have worked before. (Even the reverse by accident has caused weight gain!)
Wait.... "by accident"? As in, I accidentally ate your poop?
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Because, like you fine folks I'm part of the problem, not part of the solution, here are some actual Trump quotes:
This one was said of Obama. Just for $hits & giggles, substitute "I" for "he":
"He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election! We should have a revolution in this country!"
"The phony electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one! We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided! Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us. More votes equals a loss ... revolution! This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy! Our country is now in serious and unprecedented trouble ... like never before. The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."
"there might be someone with tomatoes in the audience. If you see them, knock the crap out of them"
"In the old days, protesters would be carried out on stretchers.
"Let's pull together. it's time to bind the wounds of division."
Everyone hear that? Let's pull together. Let by-gones be by-gones. All for one, and one for all. Yea team! We're number one! Hi mom!
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Do you want this to not work? What if it does? Will the sanctimonious need to find a new target to deride?
I think that if it does work, it will increase the gap even further. Why aren't you thin? Just take the pill you slob...
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Paleo is the vegan to low-carb's vegetarian. You don't have to go full on paleo to take advantage of a low-carb diet.
Mark my words: will not happen. Not for the vast majority of people anyway. Doctors are content to simply lecture obese patients about their eating habits and exercise and couldn't give two shits about any other factors. Trust me. I used to weigh over 300lbs and lost nearly half of that by basically eating nothing but protein bars for 5 years. to this day I have to maintain a constant hanger-inducing hunger just to stay this weight, have driven off all my friends, can't attend social gatherings of any kind where food might be present, and am just generally suicidally miserable. No doctor, anywhere, ever, has given a single fuck about how difficult it was and still is for me.
Not that I really can blame them. Doctors are just like the rest of us, they punch a clock for money.
You're missing the point. This is about explaining why the same amount of food (or energy) intake affects people differently
Absolute nonsense. From the Sunday Morning Herald summary (I don't have a Nature subscription):
From the abstract: "Here, we identify an intestinal microbiome signature that persists after successful dieting of obese mice, which contributes to faster weight regain and metabolic aberrations upon re-exposure to obesity-promoting conditions and transmits the accelerated weight regain phenotype upon inter-animal transfer."
So no, not nonsense at all, you did miss the point, and your 'common sense' hypothesis that "the gut microbiome changes have an impact on appetite" is at best a guess and at worst a post facto rationalisation because you didn't like the conclusion the authors drew. You think they went to all the effort to perform the experiments, wrote a paper on it, but somehow didn't think to control for calorific intake? Really?
Listen to this post. It speaks from experience. I've lost 150lbs and this looks like something I'd write, only with a lot fewer expletives.
All I know is that I have worked out very heavily at times in my life and while I did lose weight, I was never considered "thin". I am just the bulky type who will always have belly fat even if I am super healthy.
My sister is the same. She works out for hours a day and she is strong and fit, but still has a bigger body type.
I work with a guy who is an avid runner and he is pretty large but can run for miles.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Fuck you and every piece of shit like you. You're like one of those assholes who insists that losing weight must be easy because they eat whatever they want and never gain weight. I've lost 150lbs, it was hard work. It has, many times, made me put a gun to my head and have a serious think about whether or not I wanted to continue living. People like you, you piece of shit, telling me it shouldn't be that hard, can fucking die in a fire.
Good luck living on protein alone. You still need fat and carbs but playing with the ratios between them does yield some interesting results.
Well said. The only thing I would add is research shows that willpower is a limited resource and is depleted and replenished over time. A successful diet requires managing that resource and not starving yourself of willpower because that's when you fall off the wagon and the diet breaks or fails completely.
Finding ways to make yourself feel good about the diet and the progress you're making, along with normal day to day happiness is crucial for a successful diet. This is 10 times more important for people who use food as a form of comfort, which is a fair number of overweight folks.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
I'm surprised this isn't the takeaway message.. Focusing on high-fat or high-protein diets is what's wrong. Instead, focus on fiber, or prebiotics - the stuff your good gut bacteria wants. Ironically, the vilification of carbs plays into this problem: most fiber comes with carbs. Brown rice, fruit, whole grains, etc.. People foolishly lump them together with processed carbs (white sugar, white rice, white flour) and then end up missing out on a lot of potential fiber. Whole grains, lots of veggies, pulses, legumes and fruit will support the microbiome you want. Some of the best advice I've heard: eat 80% 'healthy' every day, and you can slack a bit with the other 20% (although the more healthy food you eat, the less inclined you are to want the unhealthy food, as your gut resets itself.)
I think something touched your nerves.
No, it's just these damn allergies. I'm highly allergic to those who refuse to accept the reality of the world around them.
Eating less fast food has far more to do with marketing than actually feeling full. No one stops in the middle of a Super-sized triple-decker McShitburger "happy" meal just because they feel full. Not when there's still 2 pounds of french fries left.
I almost never feel full. I don't know if it's my biome, my genome, my upbringing, or what. I always feel like I could eat more. As a teen and 20 something when I could eat unlimited amounts of crap and not gain weight, I would be one of those eating 5 or 6 plates of food from an all you can eat-buffet.
As I hit my 30's I began to gain weight so had to start watching what I eat. I'm always hungry, I always feel like I could eat more, but I limit what I eat to stay healthy. Some of us, myself included, never feel full. It takes a huge amount of willpower for me to not overeat and maintain a healthy weight. I fully sympathise with those who do get huge because they have large appetites. It would certainly be very easy to let go and just pig out rather than be hungry all the time, like I am.
Many people who are overweight aren't so because they continued eating after they felt full, they just don't feel full.
There are many variables to feeling full, but I noticed when I would eat a healthy dose of lean protein for a meal, I found myself full and satisfied for quite longer than I expected. Most likely it has to do with the speed in which your body can break down certain foods, but it seemed to work for me. YMMV as always.
I wouldn't dispute that at all you need all three. Like I said in another thread, keep that hamburger, drop the bun and the ketchup, but keep the thin slice of tomato.
You also never want to combine high carb and high fat in an 8 hour period. Go ahead, have that pasta, just don't have butter/cream/meatballs/cheese. Have your sausage and bacon, do not eat toast or jelly or a muffin alongside it... you could always have whole grain toast tomorrow.
Unfortunately cuisine is pretty much universally designed around combining these elements. As hunter gathers this was easy, you kill a boar you ate boar that night, you forage berries you ate berries that night, food was too scarce to render those berries into a nice glaze carbing up a ham.
Multiplex microbial assays are becoming less expensive, and computer analysis is always going down.
Less expensive for who exactly? The individual, or the greedy provider who doesn't mind at all keeping the larger profit margin created by reduced expenses? One doesn't have to peer into a crystal ball to guess how that will play out.
...once the techniques are proven what insurance company or employer wouldn't want to help their covered individuals to be healthier?
You're pitting this statement against those who financially justify the alternative of subjecting individuals to expensive treatments for far longer than necessary to ensure the bottom line growth remains linear. (ref. crystal ball)
The comorbidities for obesity are not unknown.
Not unlike the insatiable greed of certain organizations.
it can be so bad that the number of calories they need to take in can be below the level at which normal western food can supply enough nutrition.
Complete nonsense. There is no problem with dieters regularly getting scurvy. Getting enough nutrition is possible through eating a simple salad, which is a part of the normal western diet (theoretically).
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Mark my words: will not happen. Not for the vast majority of people anyway. Doctors are content to simply lecture obese patients about their eating habits and exercise and couldn't give two shits about any other factors. Trust me. I used to weigh over 300lbs and lost nearly half of that by basically eating nothing but protein bars for 5 years. to this day I have to maintain a constant hanger-inducing hunger just to stay this weight, have driven off all my friends, can't attend social gatherings of any kind where food might be present, and am just generally suicidally miserable. No doctor, anywhere, ever, has given a single fuck about how difficult it was and still is for me.
Not that I really can blame them. Doctors are just like the rest of us, they punch a clock for money.
It would appear that your entire solution to losing weight and and maintaining it, is strictly around diet.
Has the other key component of managing the human body ever come into play here? There's a reason you keep hearing exercise every time you hear the word diet. Specialists in the field seemingly don't give a shit about any other factors when those two alone attribute the most to maintaining the human body properly. A few decades of evidence also show it applies to the overwhelming majority of humans as well.
I'm not trying to hound you, I genuinely feel for your situation when you say your social life has been impacted rather drastically.
Yes, some people are just doing it wrong. Others will inevitably feel tired and hungry if they reduce their total caloric level to the point that they will actually lose any weight at all.
Nothing like holding your cure over your head for the right price, which of course will be dictated by millionaires demanding to become billionaires.
1. Assuming that such cures come to be then you wouldn't even have them without the folks that bring them about. How about being grateful instead? New tech isn't cheap when it's bleeding edge, but it gets cheaper over time as it become better understood and the kinks get worked out.
2. If you're so altruistic why don't you get crackin' on developing those cures and giving them to the rest of us for free? What's that? You don't want to change careers and spend your whole life developing stuff and get little or nothing in return? Well no shit?! Neither do they.
3. Look, buddy, nobody's twisting your arm. You don't have to buy the cure if you don't want to. You can just go live and die the "natural" way if you want-- and considering your entitled attitude it seems fair to me if they decide not to sell any to you at all.
4. At least fat people can just eat right and go to the gym and see some kind of results. As someone who has a lifelong illness I'd be damned glad to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a cure-- I'd sell my house or take out another mortgage or get a crazy loan or something, yes I would.
The only thing that "makes an awful lot of sense" here is understanding that medicine creates massive profits and isn't getting any cheaper for anyone, no matter who propagates bullshit to the masses to claim otherwise.
It might have something to do with government subsidized insurance and regulations... Especially considering that we have an awful lot of both and it somehow seems to correlate with price...
Yeah, it is not simple thermodynamics.
And anyone who claims that it is didn't pay attention during Thermodynamics or take an actual course in it rather than just what they barely retained from high school physics. The real formula is way more complex than input = output.
Barely: dU = Q + W only has one extra term.
The formulae in most thermodynamic calculations are actually quite simple, but one needs a good head for statistics to do anything really interesting with them.
Y'know, dental work doesn't seem to be in the same category as brain surgery, heart bypasses, or cancer treatment to me...
So yes, we should find out whether personalised medicine works and if so, how much more effective it is. Then, as a society, we should choose whether it is worthwhile or not. As it stands, this process happens all the time in medicine at the moment with all kinds of treatments being unavailable due to economic justification.
If nobody is buying a thing then isn't that the very definition of society not finding it to be worthwhile?
True, the probability of needing those things doesn't even rate as statistical noise relative to overpriced dental work.
They funny thing is when you compare it with the "better" fare at other restaurants, McDonald's, at least calorie wise is lower. Also, you can buy any sized sandwich you want. A hamburger has a 2 ounce patty. A triple quarter pounder has 12 ounces of meat. Why would you by a super sized sandwich and throw half of it away when you could order something smaller.
I would argue that the standard sandwich size is a quarter pound. Most fancy restaurants, their smallest burger start at a half pound. Without a doubt, the McDonald's is lower calorie.
Just curious, when speaking about "standard" sizes, are you referring to American vs. the rest of the Universe?
In case we were still left wondering what has helped super-size our citizens in the last three decades...
Hungry, sure. I mean you should expect to be hungry before you start a meal. The only person I know who couldn't lose weight without being very tired had a thyroid problem and pills fixed it.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
A) There's a saying: "You can't outrun a bad diet". In other words, losing/maintaining weight is nearly 100% about intake, because the human body is kind of ridiculously efficient and exercise doesn't actually burn that much unless you train like an olympiad.
B) I actually do exercise a considerable amount. Not as much as a body builder or triathlete, but a good 6-8 hours a week.
Point being: yes, calories in calories out = weight loss, but that isn't fucking easy for a lot of people like me. And no one, not a goddamned person, gives a flying fuck about that. You aren't losing weight, it's because you're a stupid fat piece of shit.
Ok, that was funny. Thank you. :)
While I agree with much of what you said, I had a question about this part:
studies have shown that once people become obese and start dieting their bodies go into a kind of starvation mode, where they need to keep calorie consumption down below normal levels to maintain their weight.
Are you referring to ketosis? If so, that "starvation mode" should only be a problem with low-carb diets (e.g. Atkins), given that it's triggered by a lack of sugars in your system, but you're quite right about how it can cause a bounceback once you stop and that if you want to avoid the bounceback you'll effectively need to maintain "starvation mode" in perpetuity. That said, if you're aware of a different "starvation mode" that applies more broadly to all (or other) forms of dieting, I truly would love any info you could point me towards.
My wife and I are in the process of losing weight (we're down for a combined 100 lbs since the start of 2015 thanks to modest cutbacks on portion sizes, adding light exercise, and monitoring things carefully), but we've specifically been avoiding unsustainable approaches like crash diets, crazy workouts, or anything involving ketosis, in large part because we don't want to have a bounceback at the end of all of this. As such, if you're aware of more general "starvation modes", I'd love any info you could share, that way we can start adjusting our diets (and expectations) sooner, rather than later.
For the last 4 years I have been eating primal/paleo. I lost 15 pounds in the first month, and it has stayed off. I went from 175 to 160. It was not hard. It was not grueling. I did not kill myself with workouts. It is basic body chemistry - to massively simplify it, by regulating your hormones - mainly insulin - you stabilize your body's need to store fat. I can and often do go 24 hours without eating with no ill effects at all. If your body knows how to burn fat (instead of blood sugar) when you need it, this is a trivial and simple thing. It doesn't take will power - it takes knowing what to eat so that your body learns how to regulate these hormones. The cravings for those things disappear because you break the chemical addiction that your body has to them. That is not a metaphor, that addiction is real.
Watch the talk by Dr. Peter Attia on Vimeo about our "dietary guidelines". It's a good start.
Then read the books "The Primal Blueprint" and "Why We Get Fat: And What To Do About It"... throw in "Grain Brain" while you're at it.
I will not go into a diatribe, but I was never really 'overweight'. By essentially cutting out grains, many other carbs, and inflammatory foods my life has changed for the better. I will be turning 47 soon, and feel fantastic.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I lost 50 pounds and then gained 20 of it back. I'm struggling a bit now, trying to turn the tides again in favour of losing more weight.
One problem I have is differentiating: hunger, anxiety, excess energy that I need to do something with, fatique, boredom. Eating can be a "solution" to all of these things but obviously not a good solution.
I've picked up some bad habits that I'm in the midst of trying to break: diet pop, nicotine gum, porn, and have a difficult time with portion control around certain foods. It's certainly not an easy task getting to a sustainable equilibrium.
Ideally, I want to maintain a healthy weight and have a healthy lifestyle that I can be proud of. Never give up! I will do it. I've already quit smoking for several years so I know I can definitely do this.
This explains it, with a link to the study:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016...
Basically resting calorie consumption goes way down. One guy was 700 kcal/day below his previous level, making it actually impossible to diet at a safe level to just maintain his weight.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
And, honestly, it STILL comes down to "YOU need to eat less". Short of individually tailored micromanagement of your gut, you're not going to ever really change what's in there.
The same could be said of anything though. Your legs work YOU just need to fight through your crippling joint pain. Easy right? When you can't eat "normal" portions because your body is metabolizing the energy differently that everyone around you and you are constantly fighting hunger urges, there is an undeniable psychological weight on your being. Eating less is the right solution but to only half of the problem. The second half is the sticky bit and means either suppressing those urges (the wrong way as these solutions have been around for a long time and tend to kill you) or by addressing how your body metabolizes food (gut biome). One address the symptom and the other addresses the cause.
I don't see how anything I wrote contradicts this study. Any particular person no matter how efficient they are at converting dietary fat to energy has a certain amount of food they need to eat to maintain their weight. In addition to a) the energy dense foods, they should be consuming b) leafy greens and other nutrient dense foods.
You have so much of food 'a' you can consume whatever that value happens to be for you. Don't consume more than that and fill in the rest with category 'b' foods.
Yeah, it is not simple thermodynamics. The complexity of the interactions in the body is overwhelmingly mind-boggling.
Interestingly enough, more and more researchers are buying into the lower-carb side of the diet controversy. And it seems that if you lower the amount of carbohydrates in your diet, you probably have to increase your fat intake to get enough energy to prevent starvation responses. And a gut that is adapted to burning fat for energy is significantly different from a gut that burns sugars. And so on....
However, the report of a single study doesn't provide a prescription for health. Some time ago there was good discussion about creating a comprehensive science database to compare outcomes of different research. This database would report on both successful and unsuccessful experiments and research, which could possibly cut down on instances of "fads" by identifying what works, what doesn't work, and what hasn't been tested yet.
Recent research into gut biology certainly is fascinating and exciting. It seems clear that different types of guy bacteria break down food at different rates and into different components. A lot of research has gone into fecal transplants, but that is the "cheap and roundabout way" of researching this issue, in my opinion. Some questions I have are-
1. Do different species of gut bacteria break down different types of food (vegatables, fruits, proteins, etc) differently?
2. Where are the 'ideal' (most healthy) bacteria commonly found? Are they a byproduct of food decomposition? There does seem to be some benefits of consuming fermented foods. It wouldn't be too surprising to find that bacteria good at decomposing food on the countertop are also good at decomposing food in the gut (as long as they can handle the acidity). This could imply that the super clean food practices commonly used in western countries (refrigeration, washing, etc) could actually be harmful since they restrict bacteria from proliferating.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
This is not an antiquated newspaper or Twitter. "Microbiome Changes Drive the Dieting Yo-Yo Effect, Study Finds"... are you kidding me? Either drop the "study finds" or put it in front where it belongs, and please stop with the camel case.
You're an idiot. You responded to someone saying that eating less doesn't necessarily mean losing weight by saying some shit about overeating.
It's well known that your body adapts to become more efficient with less food over time, so the weight stops dropping.
Two people can eat the same foods, exercise the same and have different results due to their gut bacteria. Swap the guts, and results will swap, too.
Diet science has been pathetic because so much of us fall on the simple plan. With Diet food companies sell their plastic food as diet, where they are designed to fit this simple plan and cause us to fail.
First protip: if you really want to lose weight, the first thing to eliminate is anything that says "diet" on the packaging.
Second protip: if you really want to lose weight, the second thing to eliminate is all those processed foods from your diet. You will want to mostly restrict yourself to fresh fruits and vegetables, fresh lean cuts of meat, and whole grains. As a first cut, a good rule of thumb is that just about anything that comes in a wrapper should be treated with suspicion.
Third protip: watch out for "empty calories". This means cakes, cookies, candies, and sodas are to be avoided/eliminated from your diet. Alcohol also has lots of empty calories too.
Way to completely ignore TFA, moron.
Free market ideas don't work when a cadre of professional doctors make these decisions on your behalf.
Not necessarily, see this for further info: http://acgblog.org/2015/10/08/poster-107-microbial-emulsion-matrices-a-novel-method-to-produce-stable-orally-available-capsules-for-fecal-microbiota-transplantation-to-treat-clostridium-difficile/
I feel so sig.
But you shouldn't be hungry when your meal ends. Some people are if they diet sufficiently to actually lose weight. Perhaps worse, perhaps they are OK at the time but 2 hours later they're hungry again. That's when the junk food tends to come in.
I find myself in the strange position was wanting to eat shit.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I don't mean to criticise, but at 6-8 hours you are pretty much in 'maintenance mode'. That's just about enough to stave off the worst of the chronic problems that arise from our sedentary lifestyles and will burn some calories, but as you note, not enough to make a significant difference to weight. For me, the exercise is more about managing my mental state and that makes it easier to maintain a healthy diet.
The University of QLD conducted a study that concluded that the WHO recommendations for exercise were about 5 times too small. Their recommendation ends up being in line with your current levels (6-8 hours).
It's hard to find time to fit more in - especially when you need a solid block of time for some exercises (esp. cardio) to be effective. Worse, as you get better at it, the same level/amount of exercise is less beneficial. You become more efficient. You then have to increase the duration or intensity. Or keep switching exercise around.
I find that I don't really see any benefit from exercise until I'm over 4 sessions of 1.5-2 hours a week. 3-4 sessions and I plateau. Less and I regress - my mental state is harder to maintain, cravings and appetite are harder to control.
I apologise if I seem to be preaching. I sympathise with your situation and struggle to 'exercise enough' myself and so may be projecting. If you can find a way to increase it (or increase the intensity), you may find that you start to see benefits beyond just burning calories.
And a brand new excuse is born. Great...
"I'm not fat, I just have a microbiome that thrives in the high-fat regime!"
Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, but that's all the more reason for the pseudo-intellectual shitheads we call today's youth to love it. Plus it has "micro" in there. That word seems popular these days.
In other news, how is this news? Fat people relapse because they give up on exercise and start eating again.
Low metabolism + low activity + (high food intake * high caloric content) = fat
I'd file this insignificant grain of evidence under metabolism and sweet tooth.
Also "hey fatty, why are your microbes such fatties?"
captcha: bulging
Reserved solely for billionaires and the party bosses (which will soon be the same coven).
I find myself in the strange position was wanting to eat shit.
I am really wondering about the possibility of hammering the gut with powerful antibiotics to kill the intestinal bacteria already there, then doing a transplant - or more likely after a while, laboratory grown poopy pills. Allowing the new bacteria to populate the GI tract and maybe a good outcome for people.
The insecure fat shamers might not like this however.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Do you want this to not work? What if it does? Will the sanctimonious need to find a new target to deride?
I think that if it does work, it will increase the gap even further. Why aren't you thin? Just take the pill you slob...
I have had some success in weight control. But it hasn't been easy, and my wife, the ectomorph, probably eats as much as I do, is taller, and weighs nearly a hundred pounds less. Sounds extreme, but she is natually thin, and I am naturally muscle bound and turn to fat if I don't exercise an extreme amount. This is becoming an issue as old sports injuries are getting really pissed at me. I think I kinda wore myself out a little.
So yeah, if I could repopulate my gut with flora that would allow me to not have to go to the extremes I have to go to, I'd sign up in an instant. Not having to constantly resist the urge to eat. Not having to exercise like I do now. Hell, I might even calm down and quit being an asshole!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Who had thougt that reverting to the old diet habits returns you to your old weigt gains? ... what a mo brainer.
Wow
If you have successfuly changed your diet and lost your weight, you obviously should stick more or less to that diet instead of reverting to eat the unhealthy crap you ate before.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
You still need to adjust your caloric intake. If you are gaining weight from exercise, that is muscle gain, which is a good thing. It will help you burn fat when you finally adjust your caloric intake. You need to consume less calories than you burn. It doesn't have to be drastic, maybe like 200kcal less than you are used to, but it will be tough. Give it a few months like that and report back when you've burned some of that fat off.
I'm on a border town with Canada and Canadians are telling us of 6 to 8 week waits for a MRI test, in the US there are walk-in MRI centers. 6 month waits for heart catheterization in Canada, here it's often within 3 days after the lab tests are done. A British Office with the same name as our office is only seeing NHS patients one day a week.
Sure you can find good deals and work out of country, 25% of US UCR for dental is still pretty high-end in Mexico. India is well know for Healthcare-tourism, China is as well.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Sure walk-in centers exist in the US if you have spare no expense attitude. Just getting in to my doctor for any appointment can take 6-8 weeks and arguing it requires getting in faster often means being directed to an ER. You can't "walk-in" to get an MRI without a doctor referral if you want there to be any chance of it being covered by your insurance and even so using that clinic will likely leave you with a series of bills amounting to $1000+ when all is said and done. Remember when a doctor or hospital visit resulted in a single bill from a single entity? Unless of course you haven't met your several thousand dollar deductible in which case it will be much much more.
That is of course assuming you are allowed to get an MRI in the first place. 99% of the time a doctor is ordering an x-ray or a CT an MRI would have been a better test but your insurance refuses or he knows it won't cover an MRI.
People do so all the time.
http://thepowerofpoop.com/epat...
http://www.theverge.com/2016/5...
https://www.google.com/search?...
I have lost 50lbs and kept it off for over 3 years myself but it is hard, very hard to do. It was akin to getting my masters degree while working full time hard. .
Would love to talk to you off line about this. Since I'm currently doing a masters (just my capstone left) while working full time, your analogy is not lost on me. Your other points match my experience very closely.
People do so all the time.
Holy shit!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.