Programmed to be fat?

Footjab

White Belt
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Interesting episode of The Nature of Things last night:

CBC -The Nature of Things with David Suzuki - Episode - Programmed to be Fat?

Highlights various studies that are bringing to light new details on the role that endocrine disruptors in our food chain/environment play in the "obesity epidemic" Definitely worth the watch.

To be clear (before someone goes off on a rant) they do not excuse people for being sedentary and gluttonous.

Thoughts?
 
[YT]S9B7im8aQjo[/YT]

I don't know seems possible
 
[YT]S9B7im8aQjo[/YT]

I don't know seems possible


I remember seeing that. It was hilarious that those kids didn't give a crap about what kind a junk they were eating.
 
Also could not watch the video, when I tried to play it it said "This content is currently unavailable" - but I think at this point it's a truism that some people are genetically predisposed to fatness, and I think the main factor is a sensitivity to carbohydrate for certain individuals. It's not just customary eating habits of a family - although that can compound fatness, it's also the biochemistry that we inherited from ancestors.
 
Yeah, video not working. One of my favorite quotes from the article though:

But a small group of scientists have begun looking beyond the obvious because of a group that can’t chew, let alone jog: infant obesity rose more than 70 per cent in just 20 years. You can’t blame them for unhealthy lifestyles. The scientists suspect that, starting in the womb, man-made chemicals may be triggering changes to our metabolism that result in life-long weight gain.

Why would you need or want to look 'beyond the obvious' when the blatantly obvious pretty much explains everything?

While it's true you can't blame an infant for being obese due to an unhealthy lifestyle- you can sure as shit blame it's parents.

I have still yet to see a single infant that was obese (for an infant that is- those little cherubs are supposed to be kinda chunky to begin with) that was breastfed for it's first 10-12 months and then weaned onto a balanced diet, while undertaking a reasonable activity level for an infant.
 
Heritability and environment are both important factors when it comes to the "cause of obesity".

In this case, environment is both dietary factors (mainly availability and palatability of food) and lifestyle/activity, and heritability is the risk of vulnerability to a given unfavorable environmental conditions. In a hypothetical environment of zero activity and virtual unlimited availability of food (both in terms of quantity and palatability), some people are more likely than others to become obese.

There are some highly-regarded researchers in the field who ascribe to the view that, in modern society, obesity is mainly genetically-predetermined (although, I personally don't agree with this).
 
There are also some recent discoveries being made about the human microbiome (flora in the gut, and everywhere else) seem to be throwing yet more spanners into the works of these formerly neat thermodynamic theories of metabolism. Apparently, over an average lifespan a healthy human gut produces microbial mass equivalent to five elephants; we understand scant few of these microbial species forming the basis of digestion, and much less what their interaction and fluctuations mean to the body as a whole. It's as though we've just discovered a new internal organ, but modern science still has a credible theory of metabolism. Honest.

tl;dr: my brain is full of fuck. I'm signing off from the whole fat debate.
 
There are also some recent discoveries being made about the human microbiome (flora in the gut, and everywhere else) seem to be throwing yet more spanners into the works of these formerly neat thermodynamic theories of metabolism. Apparently, over an average lifespan a healthy human gut produces microbial mass equivalent to five elephants; we understand scant few of these microbial species forming the basis of digestion, and much less what their interaction and fluctuations mean to the body as a whole. It's as though we've just discovered a new internal organ, but modern science still has a credible theory of metabolism. Honest.

I haven't even heard of that!

Refs plz? :)
 
I remember seeing that. It was hilarious that those kids didn't give a crap about what kind a junk they were eating.

Nutritionally speaking, there's nothing wrong with eating all the leftovers of the chicken. The additives, chemicals and whatnot, well that's another story.
 
Very few people have slow metabolisms, its really just an excuse unless you have thyroid problems.
Big people eat too much for their lifestyle and skinny people who say they eat alot really dont know what alot is, its been proven.
 
Very few people have slow metabolisms, its really just an excuse unless you have thyroid problems.
Big people eat too much for their lifestyle and skinny people who say they eat alot really dont know what alot is, its been proven.

That's strange because I don't necessarily see "big people" (including family members) with weight problems eating any more then smaller people do, in fact its the opposite. I think it's due to metabolic reasons and probably thyroid issues why they are like that.....
 
That's strange because I don't necessarily see "big people" (including family members) with weight problems eating any more then smaller people do, in fact its the opposite. I think it's due to metabolic reasons and probably thyroid issues why they are like that.....

Coming from someone who used to be fat, they're probably eating much more frequently than most people. So while it may seem like they're eating no more than average people in a single sitting, throughout the day they may be eating much more.
 
That's strange because I don't necessarily see "big people" (including family members) with weight problems eating any more then smaller people do, in fact its the opposite. I think it's due to metabolic reasons and probably thyroid issues why they are like that.....

A lot of overweight people can be anxious about eating around people. They might be making up for it with a 12 pack of donuts when they are alone later.
 
Coming from someone who used to be fat, they're probably eating much more frequently than most people. So while it may seem like they're eating no more than average people in a single sitting, throughout the day they may be eating much more.

I still don't believe they'd really be eating that much more, even with multiple meals. My dad for instance who's 30 lbs over weight has lots of small snacks/meals of low calories/health food shit all through out the day, lean meats, fruit ect. He watches his calories, runs, no carbs at night, ect and still has trouble trying to drop lbs.

Again I've never seen the prototypical "fat guy" gorge on tons of food of eat a gallon of ice cream.. I think its one of those perpetuated myths that is some one is fat they are gluttonous slobs...

Like wise I have some friends who eat like shit and stay slim, eating like pigs.

My guess is that this is a metabolic problem and not a calorie one.

Oh and isn't frequent feeding all the rage now for losing weight now?
 
Oh and isn't frequent feeding all the rage now for losing weight now?

No that one went out of favour last year. Now the healthy thing is to not eat all day and gorge like a maniac at night, which is what everybody thought fat people were doing.
 
I used to think I ate alot and was a twig, turns out I needed an extra 2000 calories to actuslly put on weight. Like I said most big people underestimate their intake and skinny people overestimate. I know people are built different with different frames but most of us werent meant to be obese.
Look back 100 yrs ago, obesity was not an epidemic back then like it is now in america. Food is easy to get nowadays and lots of people gorge themselves and most are very lazy, thats why we are the fattest country.
 
Last edited:
I like those parts of the chicken, and i like sucking the marrow out of bone, aside from blending everything and the chemicals, how was all that gross again? OMG the breast is the least tasty part, though they are good in some recipes...really???

The head and tail are the best parts of fish to me, not very filling, but i eat the WHOLE fish. Most organs aren't my thing but MANY cultures eat it.

Fucking, wasteful backwards americans.
 
no that one went out of favour last year. Now the healthy thing is to not eat all day and gorge like a maniac at night, which is what everybody thought fat people were doing.

lol!
 
Back
Top