Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday February 26 2021, @03:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the fat-chance dept.

The genetics of relatively healthy obesity:

In general, obesity is linked with a large range of health problems—for most people, at least. But for a substantial minority of those who are overweight, obesity is accompanied by indications of decent health, with no signs of impending diabetes or cardiovascular disease. These cases have probably received unwarranted attention[1]; who doesn't want to convince themselves that they're an exception to an unfortunate rule, after all?

[...] a large international team of researchers has looked into whether some of these cases might be the product of genetic influences[2]. And simply by using existing data, the team found 61 instances where a location in our genomes is associated with both elevated obesity and signs of good health, cardiovascular or otherwise.

[...] Combining all the past studies in these areas, the researchers were able to leverage a sample of hundreds of thousands of individuals.

To find the sorts of genes the team was interested in, the researchers had a simple criterion: the same area of the genome has to be associated with both one of the measures of obesity and one of the measures of metabolic or cardiovascular health. After doing the pairwise comparisons, the researchers checked whether any of the areas that came out of the analysis was associated with more than one measure (so, for example, health levels of both cholesterol and glucose).

[...] Overall, the researchers suggest these [sites] affect a variety of relevant processes. Some are upstream of fat deposition, such as insulin signaling and glucose control, and others seem to regulate the process of breaking fats back down. Still others seem to control how adipose tissue develops, the switch between white and brown fat, and the location where fat forms. None of those factors are especially surprising, but it's not necessarily predictable that they would influence things in a way that seems to limit the damage that is associated with fat accumulation.

[...] The value of this sort of study really lies elsewhere. While we know obesity is linked with a variety of health risks, those links are complex and poorly understood at the moment. Research like this could cut back on the unknowns and help us figure out ways in which we might separate obesity, which doesn't seem to be going away, from some of its consequences.

Journal References:
[1] Gordon I. Smith, Bettina Mittendorfer, Samuel Klein. Metabolically healthy obesity: facts and fantasies [open], The Journal of Clinical Investigation (DOI: 10.1172/JCI129186)
[2] Lam O. Huang, Alexander Rauch, Eugenia Mazzaferro, et al. Genome-wide discovery of genetic loci that uncouple excess adiposity from its comorbidities, Nature Metabolism (DOI: 10.1038/s42255-021-00346-2)


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by seeprime on Friday February 26 2021, @03:37PM (6 children)

    by seeprime (5580) on Friday February 26 2021, @03:37PM (#1117583)

    Ralphie May used to brag about how fat he was and how superior his baseline health tests were, very low A1C, etc. That was true until it wasn't. Ralphie died suddenly at 45 of a heart attack.
    Healthy" obesity at age 40, with no expression of diabetes or heart disease, can change rapidly in a short time. The human body is not designed to live a long healthy life with BMI's over 40.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:10PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:10PM (#1117594)
      And let’s not forget the wear and tear on joints that leads to an increasingly sedentary lifestyle, so all of a sudden the benefits of the exercise from moving all that lard around actually disappear for, as the article puns, this substantial minority . To quote;

      But for a substantial minority

      Still would not want to be one of those who are , shall we say, substantially obese.

    • (Score: 1) by js290 on Friday February 26 2021, @04:35PM

      by js290 (14148) on Friday February 26 2021, @04:35PM (#1117598)

      The Widowmaker - it could save your life ! #KnowYourScore​ #CAC [youtu.be]

      Rosedale Diet tests:

      The tests are listed in order of importance. The tests at the top of the list are most important. The optimal values are listed alongside the tests.
      • Leptin: 4 to 6 ng/dL
      • Fasting Insulin: 10 IU/mL and below
      • HbgA1c: 4.5 percent or less
      • Glucose: 70 to 85 mg/dL
      • Free T3: 2.2 to 3.0 pg/mL
      • Basal Body Temperature: 96.8 to 97.5 degrees F and below
      • IGF-1: 90 to 360 ng/mL (normal for those aged forty and over)
      • Norepinephrine: 250 to 350 pg/mL (the lower end of the range is optimal)
      • Highly Sensitive C-Reactive Protein: less than 1.0
      • Triglycerides: 100 mg/dL
      • Homocysteine: less than 6 umol/L
      • Blood Urea Nitrogen: 17 mg/dL
      • Creatinine: 0.7 to 1.0 mg/dL
      • Uric Acid: 3 to 7 mg/dL
      • Liver Enzymes: ALP 44 to 147 IU/l, ALT 5 to 30 IU/l, AST 10 to 34 IU/l
      • Cholesterol: HDL higher than 40 mg/dL, high proportion of large LDL to small dense LDL

    • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:57PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:57PM (#1117606)

      So you're a science denier and a bigot.

      • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:03PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:03PM (#1117610)

        So you're a reality denier and obese.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:27PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:27PM (#1117676)
        There are obvious flaws in the study. It’s better classified as “sciencey” if they’re not obvious to you, you’re the target market.
    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday February 26 2021, @06:31PM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Friday February 26 2021, @06:31PM (#1117648)

      Larger body, more cells, more blood vessels to pump oxygen/nutrients to them, more blood being pumped to them, more continuous work on the heart, eventually an enlarged heart. Chemistry aside, I'd think that's a mechanical scaling consideration.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @03:56PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @03:56PM (#1117591)

    The juice ain't worth the squeeze
    If the juice don't look like this
    -Lizzo

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by js290 on Friday February 26 2021, @04:30PM (18 children)

    by js290 (14148) on Friday February 26 2021, @04:30PM (#1117595)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:35PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @04:35PM (#1117597)
      Every gram of fat had to be eaten first. Break their jaws and lock the fridge and they’ll lose weight.
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday February 26 2021, @05:02PM (4 children)

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Friday February 26 2021, @05:02PM (#1117607) Homepage Journal

        Every gram of fat had to be eaten first.

        Not even slightly correct. You can eat yourself so big you sweat Crisco without eating a lipid of any sort in your entire life. Your body will cheerfully take excess carbs, do a bit of chemistry, and store them as an enormous ass.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Friday February 26 2021, @06:03PM (1 child)

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday February 26 2021, @06:03PM (#1117627) Journal

          Those carbs were eaten first if you want to get semantical.

        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:57PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:57PM (#1117688)
          You misinterpreted what I wrote. Let me be more explicit. Every gram OF FAT ON THEIR BLOATED OBESE BODIES had to first be ingested as food. In case you didn’t get a clue from the subject matter - obese fat people. Obese people are fatties by definition - a body mass index with lots of fat to pinch between the measuring calipers, not lean hard muscular bodies.

          The fatso influences who try to make themselves and others feel good about eating themselves to an early grave. The ones who NEED body shaming, the same as we did to smokers. But oh noes, think of the feelz!

          This is political correctness that kills. 400 pound morbidly obese walking dead. Coming soon to an ER near you. Then sucking the social security system dry because they can’t work at 40 and need personal ambulatory carts and oxygen and prosthetics to replace the body parts they lose to amputations as it all falls apart.

          We need more public service ads showing this reality. People too fat to walk, consuming dozens of chocolate bars and gallons od Diet Coke while smoking their lungs to uselessness. Complaining about how welfare doesn’t give them enough they just had their satellite tv cut off and they have unpaid cable bills so they can’t get cable again and the government won’t pay for a better place or new furniture or someone to clean up to wash the dishes or take out the garbage or get rid of the cockroaches. And how a 75% rent subsidy on top of welfare and disability isn’t enough. They deserve more! Even though they never worked an honest job in their life, always cash under the table to avoid the taxes that are supporting them.

          One good thing about Covid - some of those subsidies will be cut because they’re not sustainable. So maybe the next generation won’t fall into what Dr Martin King called the welfare trap. The red states should be scared. White trash gonna have to clean up their act.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:31PM (10 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:31PM (#1117619)

      You don't get fat from fat, you get fat from excessive consumption. You literally cannot gain more weight than you consume. It is literally physically impossible. And if you're gaining weight (and don't want to) then you're consuming too much. Losing weight is extremely easy but requires discipline because it's uncomfortable. Just eat less. Feeling hungry is not starving. The human body can easily and safely go without food for 10+ days before you start starving, and 20+ days before you start suffering potentially serious issues.

      I'm not suggesting you fast for days at a time, but simply reduce the amount you consume - emphasizing that that discomfort you'll feel is hardly the end of the world. The hardest part is going to bed hungry, but you get used to it - fast. I started intermittent fasting a few years ago and going to sleep with a rumbling stomach was tough. For a month or two. Now even though I've expanded my general fasting to about 24 hours (I eat once a day), I sleep like a baby.

      I think the hard part for everybody is realizing the point where your lifestyle/metabolism/etc shift gears. You spend literally your entire life eating (and drinking.. oh that's a big one) one way, and then in a very brief period of time a number of changes dictate you start eating in a very different way that's a whole lot less enjoyable than it was for the decades prior. Such is life.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by theluggage on Friday February 26 2021, @07:24PM (5 children)

        by theluggage (1797) on Friday February 26 2021, @07:24PM (#1117675)

        You literally cannot gain more weight than you consume. It is literally physically impossible.

        ...and a quick google will tell you that the average USAian eats 2000 pounds of food in a year (...and it should be patently obvious that you eat a lot more than your own weight in food in a relatively short period. So, maybe, just maybe, there's a bit more to it than conservation of mass.

        Trouble is, it's very hard to give up an "eating addiction" when you need to buy, prepare and eat food on a daily basis. If humans needed to drink exactly 4 pints of beer and smoke 2 cigarettes a week - no more, no less - do you think anybody would ever survive alcoholism or give up smoking?

        If I ate exactly what I wanted, when I wanted, my body would have been craned out of my house by the fire department years ago. "Just eat less" is really, really not helpful. Good for you if you've found a way that works, good for you (I'd wondered about eating alternate days or something, myself).

        • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:57PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:57PM (#1117687)

          The reason I said what I said is because most people, who have trouble losing weight, are in denial. They will claim they tried eating only 500 calories a day (or whatever absurd number) and still gained weight. And it's simply physically impossible. And if it were possible then the person who's in such a state should consider themselves blessed to not only have the world's most efficient body, but to now only need to 300 calories a day indefinitely. Think of the time/$ saved there. The advice is also the most important because any other option (that will actually work) is going to be a subset of this basic advice. Even things like gastric bypass surgery is little more than an extremely brutal, extremely dangerous, hack (pun very much intended) to make you eat less.

          And I think focusing on this core issue also forces one to acknowledge the problem. It's all about self discipline. It's not glandular, it's not genetic, it's not for any other reason than the fact that you are consuming more food than you need or should be. Yes eating less is uncomfortable, and it's damn sure not as much fun, but it is the one and only way to maintain a healthy weight. Even exercise, as a direct weight loss instrument, is futile. Running, for instance, burns [very roughly] about 100 calories a mile. A bottle of coke has 240 calories. 2.4 miles of running and you've burnt off exactly one coke. And most people who need to lose weight would struggle to run even a single mile, so it's just a complete nonstarter. Indirectly the metabolism gain and so on can be useful, but if you end up eating more it's very possible (if not likely) that that gym membership is actually adding to the lbs.

          So how do you get self discipline is the question? And that is all in your head - there's no trick or strategy. But accepting that this is the issue makes everything else so much easier, because you're actually looking at the right problem.

          • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @08:48PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @08:48PM (#1117701)

            Studies showed long ago that the people who claimed to stick to their strict diets were lying to themselves. Larger portions, snacks that they “forget about “, etc. Denial.

            It’s amazing that people still continue to insist, in defence to the laws of conservation of energy, that they can eat less than their body burns, and still gain weight long-term.

            Over the short term it’s expected you’d gain weight. Fat is lighter than water, and as you burn stored fat, the cells don’t immediately shrink - water takes the place of fat. So people can indeed burn fat and gain weight, but it’s temporary. Keep it up and the fat cells will eventually shrink, getting rid of the excess water that hid the initial fat loss. The trick is to persevere, and to understand that if you’re not cheating, early weight gain is a sign of losing fat.

          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by theluggage on Sunday February 28 2021, @03:25PM (1 child)

            by theluggage (1797) on Sunday February 28 2021, @03:25PM (#1118196)

            They will claim they tried eating only 500 calories a day (or whatever absurd number) and still gained weight.

            Except (a) nobody you replied to here was claiming that and (b) you bring up calories now but you were originally making a really ridiculous comparison between weight of food and weight gained. Yes - duh! - you can't physically put on more weight than you eat (and drink - including water) but the vast majority of what you put in one end comes out the other - how much you actually retain as body fat (...and how much body fat you lose if you eat less) depends on a lot of factors - and not just what you eat in terms of calories, fat etc. but your personal metabolism and genetics (as has been shown by study after study and subsequently ignored in favour of puritan moralising).

            Here's a quick summary of some reasons why things aren't that simple. [uofmhealth.org]

            ...and, yes, people lie/deny about their diets. That's because living 24/7 with your body telling you to eat more for the rest of your life isn't sustainable - and for many people, even doing that only results in them being a bit less obese.

            Running, for instance, burns [very roughly] about 100 calories a mile.

            So, roughly, does walking [verywellfit.com] (especially if you're carrying extra weight!). Which most people can manage. There's problem #57: super-fit endorphin junkies who conflate "exercise" with lycra-clad agony (oh, add school PE classes to that list - queuing up for half an hour for one clumsy leap over a vaulting horse is not exercise).

            A bottle of coke has 240 calories. 2.4 miles of running and you've burnt off exactly one coke. And most people who need to lose weight would struggle to run even a single mile, so it's just a complete nonstarter.

            Yes, because all obese people are too stupid to skip the post-exercise coke. Otherwise, burning off a coke's-worth of calories is a win all round. Problem #64: the mass media has done an awful lot of damage confusing obesity with serious psychological (over-) eating disorders on 6 deep-fried meals a day and stereotypical "fatties" with a family-sized bag of chips permanently grasped in their chubby mitt. Like all stereotypes, such people exist, of course, but they are not "the obesity epidemic".

            One time I did manage to lose significant weight was when circumstances/opportunity and weather conspired to allow me to cycle to work pretty much daily for about 6 months - while pretty much not worrying about what I ate. The first couple of days are a bastard, though... Trouble is, then the winter comes...

            Problem #67: sedentary lifestyles. Seriously, rejecting exercise as a big part of the solution is ridiculous, as is rejecting things like walking/gardening/housework as exercise. If you need to get somewhere that you can reach on foot, walk. You might still have to skip second breakfast, but it helps.

            It's perfectly true that you only lose weight by eating less and taking more exercise - and most people already know that - but there is no "just" about it. What constitutes "less", and how effectively it works varies from person to person. Anything - research or insights - that can make that process easier - is to be welcomed, not dismissed with words to the effect of "just cut out the pies fatso".

            • (Score: 1) by js290 on Monday March 01 2021, @01:19AM

              by js290 (14148) on Monday March 01 2021, @01:19AM (#1118344)

              CI affects CO and vice versa, they cannot be treated independently.

              The Glucose-Fatty Acid Cycle: [bit.ly]

              The underlying theme of the glucose-fatty acid cycle is that the utilization of one nutrient (e.g. glucose) directly inhibits the use of the other (in this case fatty acids) without hormonal mediation.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2021, @03:58PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2021, @03:58PM (#1118207)

          There is not only how much but also what kinds.

          US food seems to be drenched in sugars.

          Heinz condiments for example is sickening sweet compared to European brands.

          The human body was developed to forage for fruits and like, and those rarely have the kind of concentration of sugars etc that typical modern meal will have (in particular those tuned by corporations to have addictive properties).

      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:29PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:29PM (#1117679)

        Good advice but it falls on deaf ears. Fatties don't science.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Friday February 26 2021, @07:39PM (2 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 26 2021, @07:39PM (#1117681) Journal

        And if you're gaining weight (and don't want to) then you're consuming too much.

        Given that you aren't constantly dripping food into yourself, it's naturally you'll overeat just a bit at any one meal.
        If your body is so outta whack that any little extra gets converted with high priority in fat and provided as fuel with second priority, you'll gain weight while feeling exhausted most of the time.

        While I can't support this with evidence, seems plausible enough that there are people experiencing this, especially among the forced** sedentary ones

        ---

        ** office type of work, programming included.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @08:09PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @08:09PM (#1117690)

          That's not out of whack though. That is exactly what your body should do. Your body is basically an engine. And millions of years of evolution have turned it into an incredibly efficient and accepting engine. Dump pretty much anything, within reason, into it - and it'll give you as much energy as you request (and it can muster), and convert anything that's left over into storage available for later emergency usage. I mean how cool is that when you think about it? Or how about the fact that we can go weeks without eating? The human body is awesome.

        • (Score: 1) by js290 on Friday February 26 2021, @09:40PM

          by js290 (14148) on Friday February 26 2021, @09:40PM (#1117730)
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @11:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @11:49PM (#1117766)

      It's also worth noting that obese fat cells don't divide, they just inflate further.

  • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @05:23PM (#1117616)

    zoomi has variously claimed to be 6 ft tall and 130 pounds, more recently she claimes to be 5' 10" tall, and still 130 pounds. Here, she makes a sub to justify her fat sow's ass. Who wants to make odds that she's about 5' 4" and 190 pounds?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @06:33PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @06:33PM (#1117651)

    Is not healthy for my eyeballs. I'm lookin' at you, Walmart greeters.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @09:31PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @09:31PM (#1117723)

      Not so much the Walmart greeters, but the peopleofwalmart.com that make you reach for the eye bleach. Many on mobility scooters dragging around oxygen tanks. Baskets full of chips, diet pop, waffles, chocolate bars, and cigs. In a tank top and xxxx-sized yoga pants.

      Because their “plus sized” partners are either already dead, unable to leave the house, or their spouse got the munchies one night and chewed off a leg.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:15PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @07:15PM (#1117670)

    Americans will celebrate this news with an extra lard sandwich for dinner and new tires for the mobility scooter.

  • (Score: 1) by Taxi Dudinous on Friday February 26 2021, @08:32PM (2 children)

    by Taxi Dudinous (8690) on Friday February 26 2021, @08:32PM (#1117692)

    They apparently do not develop much visceral fat, but rather pile it on under the skin. It is claimed they are healthy, with normal triglyceride levels and whatnot. BUT, they have a life expectancy that is 10-15 years less than the average. https://www.businessinsider.com/sumo-wrestlers-obesity-diet-calories-exercise-symptoms-2019-3?op=1 [businessinsider.com]
    I'd say any extreme is probably not so good for you.
    Stay active, Eat smart. Maybe you will get lucky and live a little longer than most.
    Or maybe you'll get hit by a bus.
    One never knows.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday February 26 2021, @09:09PM (1 child)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 26 2021, @09:09PM (#1117713) Journal

      Or maybe you'll get hit by a taxi.

      FTFY ;^)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:21AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:21AM (#1117853)

        Or even a taxidermist. [disrn.com]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @09:18PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @09:18PM (#1117716)
    Yeah some of those extremely fat people probably have better genes than me.

    Because if I tried to get that fat I would likely be dead before I got even halfway as fat as them.

    Not saying they'd live long OK? Just saying it's impressive how their genetics allows them to get that fat and still be alive.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @10:53PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @10:53PM (#1117756)

    I know this place isn't exactly a bastion of progressive values, but what the serious fuck? This whole comment section is full of fat-shaming masquerading as science, and the worst part is it's all moderated up.

    We have a real science article here, and you all take the opportunity to tell fat people they just aren't trying hard enough? Please. Tell that to my mother-in-law who consumes about 1200 calories a day, of which 0% is refined sugars, but is still obese.

    Read my signature. If you're not presenting original research, and you're not citing your sources, your "science" is bullshit. BULLSHIT. Nothing but an excuse to make yourself out to be better than everyone else.

    Which is especially ironic, since demographically speaking, this place is likely full of basement-dwellers that spend their days munching on cheetos and mountain dew. Hey, I'm not judging. Just pointing out that it's hypocritical to call other people fatties while you try to fit your own growing ass into your size 40 pants.

    And no, I'm not even defending myself here. I'm 6' and 155 lbs, in the middle of a daily spiritual fast. And I recognize that my genetics are what allow me to get away with basically zero exercise, unlike all you idiots who think you somehow earned your right to eat like a working man but work a desk job without having to install a winch to get in and out of the car.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @11:20PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @11:20PM (#1117763)

      fat-shaming

      Well the fat people are so lazy they no longer feel obliged to be ashamed of themselves, and leave us to pick up their slack.

    • (Score: 1) by js290 on Saturday February 27 2021, @02:53AM

      by js290 (14148) on Saturday February 27 2021, @02:53AM (#1117815)

      And I recognize that my genetics are what allow me to get away with basically zero exercise, unlike all you idiots...

      this AC has superior genetics, donchakno

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:01AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:01AM (#1117846)

      Science can and often ends up being co-opted to fit the desired narratives of a time. The most obvious example of this is social psychology today. The entire field has a round a 25% [wikipedia.org] (not referencing Wiki, but the multiple relevant sources they reference) replication rate. Such is the state of such science today that if you want to know the reality of social science, take any claim in social sciences (or at least social psychology) and assumes it's false (or not statistically significant) and you'd be right 75% of the time, vastly more accurately informed than the person taking "the science" at face value to inform them.

      Fatness is a big deal, no pun intended. We're approaching the majority of Americans being obese. And there are huge lobbies against recognizing the actual problem. Commercial interests such as companies that produce or rely upon sugar, high fructose corn syrup, etc are one side of the equation. And the political equation is the other. The answer to obesity is self discipline, which runs contrary to the unspoken progressive mantra of "nothing is your own fault."

      If "fat shaming" is what it takes to get people to wake up, then it could literally save hundreds of millions of lives. We're headed towards a society where obesity (in terms of gross cost on life expectancy) is becoming a greater health pandemic than cancer, aids, covid, or virtually anything else. Hahah, people 100 years ago would probably imagine we were living in a utopia. Certainly doesn't feel that way, but one does have to smile when considering that such are the problems of society today.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:09AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @05:09AM (#1117851)

      Also, re: mama. Anybody who has reached the ripe old age of 30, perhaps 40 for the truly blessed, has long since realized something: the notion of a fixed "normal" consumption of calories is absurd. Everybody's body is different, and even your own body itself radically changes over time. If somebody gains weight on 1200 calories, they need to eat 800 calories. It's just that simple. No it's not fun, it's not fair, and it's not especially easy. That's life. [youtube.com]

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 27 2021, @09:55PM

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 27 2021, @09:55PM (#1118043) Homepage Journal

      Because if they're not happy with their weight, they should be ashamed. Negative social reinforcement of bad behavior is what shame is.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Saturday February 27 2021, @07:14PM

    by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 27 2021, @07:14PM (#1118005) Homepage Journal

    I used to weigh 110 kg. Now I'm about 90 kg.

    How did I lose all that weight despite eating three times as much as my wife and sometime still feeling hungry?

    Easy. I just had a pancreatic stone that blocked digestive enzymes from getting to my digestive tract.

    I couldn't actually digest much of the food I was eating.

    My doctor prescribed Creon, a pill that provides digestive enzymes.

    It took a month before my appetite suddenly dropped. It seems if too that long for my body to figure out that I no longer needed to eat that much.

    I do not recommend this method of achieving weight loss.

(1)