SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Virginia Tech drug researcher develops 'fat burning' molecule that has implications for treatment of obesity (Science Daily)
"Obesity is the biggest health problem in the United States. But, it is hard for people to lose weight and keep it off; being on a diet can be so difficult. So, a pharmacological approach, or a drug, could help out and would be beneficial for all of society," said Webster Santos, professor of chemistry and the Cliff and Agnes Lilly Faculty Fellow of Drug Discovery in the College of Science at Virginia Tech.
Santos and his colleagues have recently identified a small mitochondrial uncoupler, named BAM15, that decreases the body fat mass of mice without affecting food intake and muscle mass or increasing body temperature. Additionally, the molecule decreases insulin resistance and has beneficial effects on oxidative stress and inflammation.
The findings, published in Nature Communications on May 14, 2020, hold promise for future treatment and prevention of obesity, diabetes, and especially nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a type of fatty liver disease that is characterized by inflammation and fat accumulation in the liver. In the next few years, the condition is expected to become the leading cause of liver transplants in the United States.
Mitochondrial uncoupler BAM15 reverses diet-induced obesity and insulin resistance in mice (open, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-16298-2) (DX)
Mitochondrial uncoupler BAM15 inhibits artery constriction and potently activates AMPK in vascular smooth muscle cells (open, DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2018.07.010) (DX)
BAM15‐mediated mitochondrial uncoupling protects against obesity and improves glycemic control (open, DOI: 10.15252/emmm.202012088) (DX)
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by lgsoynews on Saturday June 13 2020, @10:53AM (25 children)
Stop trying to solve a societal problem with drugs/pills!
NO, it's not! It's shameful to frame things that way, he should know better. Because "dieting" is not the solution to weight loss, and HE KNOWS IT.
To lose weight (and to keep the loss in the long term), you don't need the lastest fad diet, you need an appropriate (healthy) lifestyle. And it's not as if it were a secret: it has been known forever!
There is no need for pills either. People used to be "thin", and they did not use pills, did they?
What is -very- difficult is changing one's lifestyle, especially when society (and food companies) encourage the wrong behaviours. But it can be done, some people have done it and lost dozens or even hundreds of pounds (I've seen Youtubers like that).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by deimtee on Saturday June 13 2020, @11:51AM (6 children)
There's got to be more to it than just modern people eating like pigs. Look at crowd scenes in movies from the the 70's and earlier. (Not ones full of extras, but where they used real crowd footage because it was cheaper.) Fat people were rare. Compare it with a modern crowd shot where playing spot-the-skinny is a tough game.
There were plenty of people back then who had enough money to eat as much as they wanted. Where are the ancient fatties?
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:16PM (2 children)
There's more unnecessary luxury food available nowadays, like chips and ice cream and such. The need to eat is one of the most primitive drives, probably billions of years old. In our society our intellect should be able to master such irrational behavior, but the current obesity situation is proof that this isn't working for many people.
There have always been obese people, just look up 'gout' (rich man's disease) to find them.
(Score: 5, Informative) by NickM on Saturday June 13 2020, @02:48PM (1 child)
Concentrated fructose is in part responsable, at least according to my doctor.
Last time I saw him, I told that I was permanently avoiding candy, icecream and the like since the day after I felt like had abused alcohol. His response was that if I had the willpower to do so it was a good thing since concentrated fructose is particularly hard on the liver (like the TFA noted) He then talked to me about a paper he read recently where the researchers were beginning to show¹ that the switch form glucose to concentrated fructose (mostly HFCS) that started mid 80s, early 90s, for purely economical reasons, was in part responsible for the obesity epidemic.
All that to says that it is not only that there is more energy dense junk food consumed but that most of the junk food available nowadays is objectively more harmful than what was available in the 70s.
1- the conclusion was the archetypal: more studies are needed (read we need more money and want to continue to do the same thing we are doing)
I a master of typographic, grammatical and miscellaneous errors !
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @04:30PM
From 2009 the effects of sugar on society including the physiological effects on the human body:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM [youtube.com]
The effects of artificial sweeteners on insulin production: https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20140917/artificial-sweeteners-blood-sugar#1 [webmd.com]
The role of insulin on fat production (and fat loss suppression): https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/9-fixes-for-weight-hormones#section1 [healthline.com]
Conclusions for me confirmed by experimentation:
1) Consume fructose and I will gain weight.
2) Avoid fructose but consume artificial sweeteners and I won't gain weight, but I won't lose weight either.
3) Avoid fructose and artificial sweeteners as much as possible and I will lose weight.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2020, @04:37AM (1 child)
Ancient Fatties most certainly did exist. Fat was a sign of wealth. If you were fat, you were signalling to the people around you that you could afford extra food and relaxation. I believe from reading history, that merchants would often fatten up to prepare for a long journey too.
That, and the ancient world had people get drunk and stoned too. So eating with the munchies goes back to ancient times and beyond.
These days are not hard to figure out either. Look at Dazed and Confused, which is considered fairly representative of its time. Munchies, but still not a lot of fatties. The one take away though was that people were far more physically active. We have generations that socialized on the couch through technology, while still having the munchies. It really seems like the worst instincts and behaviors are well catered to by business. They figured out the same thing. More chips, ice cream, tasty processed foods.
When our technologies start enoucraging physical behavior and fitness again, we will see a change. Until then, I expect we will continue to get fatter on average.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2020, @10:17PM
It's a social problem, but not necessarily the way you describe. When I was a kid I didn't have access to safe places for outdoor play and my parents were working too hard at their jobs to take us anywhere. So I spent a lot of time indoors, and my siblings and I were all fat.
My career was good enough that I had my kids in a daycare, where they got plenty of unstructured activity time. Only one of my four kids is fat - and she spent the first twelve years of her life with undiagnosed lactose intolerance. She sat around all day because she had terrible stomach aches. We finally figured out the lactose intolerance and cut dairy from her diet, and her activity level is starting to ramp up to match her siblings.
Inner city kids, kids who have to take care of a younger baby brother or sister, people who need to work two jobs to pay their bills, people with untreated health problems - they all have obstacles to healthy activity. I really think the best things society could do for obesity is make gym class (with gym teachers that aren't assholes) a mandatory part of every school day so kids who don't have an opportunity to exercise outside school are still active and cut the full time work week back to 35 hours.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Immerman on Sunday June 14 2020, @04:37PM
>There's got to be more to it than just modern people eating like pigs.
There definitely is - we see the same fattening trend in lab animals with well-documented diets and lifestyles. Animals with the same diets, under the same conditions, are now getting fatter than in the past.
Environmental saturation with pseudo-estrogens is a likely contributor - from both birth control and plastics. And there's a cornucopia of other unnatural organic compounds permeating the environment as well - both synthetic, and things that synthetics have broken down or recombined into.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Dr Spin on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:29PM (2 children)
If it is entirely a societal problem, how do you explain the fact that small furry mammals living in parts of the world with very few humans are also becoming obese?
Hit: probably not due to Netflix and Android phones.
And no, I wont Google a link for you, because you would not believe it if I gave you one. You want research? do it yourself.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @05:22PM (1 child)
I might have believed it though, had you linked.
If that may be established, then perhaps we are building a case for maybe rethinking pesticides, herbicides and GMO crops--not because GMO is a problem (and omfg do the marketers and low-information journalists like to confuse this issue), but because engineering an organism that is resistant to glyphosate for the sole purpose of drenching it in glyphosate is maybe not a good idea all-in-all. Rice that produces β-carotine is a better use of that tech.
Or maybe it builds a case for something else, IANAExpert. But it's your evidence, you brought it up, you provide it.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Sunday June 14 2020, @04:41PM
I remember reading articles on it myself. In my case it was comparing lab animals with well-documented diets and "lifestyles", ruling out most other potential confounding factors.
I'm not spending a bunch of time trying to dig up documentation to appease an AC's skepticism, but there have definitely been studies suggesting a much wider trend.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Barenflimski on Saturday June 13 2020, @01:11PM (7 children)
If this stuff worked, I'd use it like salt in a shaker on every meal.
There are many combinations of factors that make us bigger. Number one for me is access to places to exercise.
Here is just one example.
My town leadership would tell you we have a great trail system. They'd refer you to the gym we built 20 years ago and the workout rooms. They'd give you pamphlets about the many classes you can take. They'd show you the beautiful pool.
What I'll tell you is that in reality they close the parks at dark. They charge for the gym which is only open 2 hours outside of regular business hours. If you cant workout between 6pm and 7pm at the gym you can't use it. In the winter the trails are closed after work as its dark at 4:30pm. Lots of our families don't have money to pay for exercise. Kids studying late can't go out after 9pm to exercise as it's a curfew violation. Break any of these rules and you're going to have to talk with the police and address the court once you get your ticket.
The amount of time one can spend outside freely is extremely limited today. For most families in my community, exercise just isn't accessible unless it is a dedicated activity. Where we used to get exercise in our daily routines just by walking out the front door, those opportunities just don't exist or are extremely limited by the physical and punitive environment we've created. We'll pave new roads and spend $50k on a mile of road that is used by 2 cars a day without thinking twice, but just try to get a new park with a $1k jungle gym that doesn't need to be plowed or repaved. On top of that, my situation here is much better than many who have no trails and no gyms and are stuck in a concrete jungle surrounded by highways and other main roads.
Unfortunately, here in the United States, we treat all of our societal ills with pills. I have not once seen our government try to implement a change to the structure of our cities and towns to help with depression and anxiety. I have not once seen our communities try to suggest people adjust their daily schedules to permit everyone to be more healthy in their daily routines. I've yet to see anyone actually try to limit cars to promote bicycles and walking.
Instead of holistically changing how we all live and addressing these things together, pills give the illusion of giving each person their own free choice. If you can't commit to a 2 hour a day routine outside of work between 5pm and 7pm, then your other choice is to take a pill. This is the same choice we give the almost 20% (ADAA [adaa.org]) of the population that is clinically depressed in this country. Sad? Can't move? You can choose to take this pill then and help yourself.
So, as sad as it is and as obvious as I think it is to begin to address these things without pills, most people are going to say, "Gimme the salt shaker full of BAM15 and my anti-anxiety meds and throw in another TV dinner!" while they wave the flag and explain to you how this is their choice. In other words, with nothing else changing, this might be folks best opportunity to deal with the ills of modern living.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Saturday June 13 2020, @03:24PM
> Number one for me is access to places to exercise.
Since I've been locked at home, or shielding as it's called here, due to this damned virus, access to places to exercise is somewhat limited.
Add to that the people on my social media feeds posting about their multi-hour jaunts for their "approved" exercise (my quotes - because it's not approved, they just want to go out to nice places to do their exercise and spread disease), and the nice weather, and the frustration is palpable.
This is why I have got bigger in lockdown/shielding, obviously.
-21lbs bigger in fact.
Yeah, that's a minus - I am a stone and a half lighter through staying at home.
Exercise is something you do, a place is somewhere you go, the two are not related.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @04:09PM (2 children)
When my dad went to high school in urban New Jersey, waaay back in the dark ages, gym class was every day and by high school everyone - every boy, every girl - started each gym class with a one mile run. So if you lived in an apartment and didn't have a safe yard to play in, you still got exercise. If you were too busy taking care of your baby brother or your sick grandmother in the evening, you still got exercise. If you were working in the family restaurant or farm in the evening, you still got exercise. If your teachers buried you in homework and you were too busy to do anything else, you still got exercise. If you lived in a neighborhood with high crime rates and it wasn't safe for you to go outside, you still got exercise. And yes, if you were sitting on your ass from after school until you went to bed watching I Love Lucy reruns, you still got exercise.
There are dozens of reasons we need to bring that back into the education system.
And for the adults, far more jobs had physical labor. There were trucks and forklifts and jackhammers, but far fewer white collar jobs and far fewer automated aspects of blue collar work. And to be clear, manual labor is not a universally wonderful thing - most men in my grandfather's generation were nearly cripples in their 60s from the wear and tear on their bodies from forty years of manual labor. That is, those that were still alive were nearly cripples. A good minority didn't live that long because of lung disease from the work, or alcoholism because they used alcohol to cope with chronic pain.
I'm not sure what the solution is there. My health does suffer because I sit at a desk all day, but my neighbor that does roofing is wracked with joint and back pain and also in treatment for skin cancer.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @05:25PM (1 child)
Take the macho horseshit out of gym class first. A class to exercise is a good idea. I don't need the toxic masculinity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2020, @12:30AM
Absolutely. One of my kids wants to be a gym teacher, and I keep telling him: a gym teacher isn't there for the youth athletes. The youth athletes don't need a gym teacher. The gym teacher is there for everyone else, to help them develop an enjoyment of exercise that they will carry with them through their entire lives.
Most gym teachers don't figure that out.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:31PM (1 child)
"If this stuff worked, I'd use it like salt in a shaker on every meal."
I don't think the FDA would approve anything that can't kill you. I hear that in order for anything to get FDA approved you have to be able to overdose and die from it. They have to know what dose will kill a mouse in an experiment. If your experiment resulted in no deaths they won't approve it even if it cured them of many/all health problems.
Since good diet is not something that can kill a mouse (when compared to a bad diet) it can't possibly be FDA approved to treat anything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:44PM
I think that also applies to things like herbs and whatnot. The FDA won't approve it if you can't provide what a lethal dose is and if it's pretty harmless and doesn't hurt any mouse subjects yet miraculously cures many ailments the FDA still won't approve it.
and if it's something new the FDA can prevent it from reaching market or remove it from the market (the DSHEA restricts the FDA from removing products from the market if they have been on the market for so long but new products they can still remove). So this miracle cure, if it's harmless, will never see the light of day.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @10:25PM
You are making it too complicated. Other people are also making it too complicated. Nobody needs to go to a gym or go to special trails to work out.
All you need to burn 300 calories in 30 minutes is a good pair of running shoes and healthy legs.
Or buy a good set of bands for $30, a pull-up bar for $50, and P90X DVDs for $100 and you have a fun, enjoyable, and motivational 5-day whole body workout routine in your home than beats most anything you will get in a gym.
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Saturday June 13 2020, @02:30PM
But don't you see? If they can sell you the junk food, and then sell you something to mitigate the effects of the junk food, that means more corporate profits. Only a communist would be against that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @04:23PM (5 children)
All of the studies on sustained fat loss - that is, on a two year or longer time scale - contradict you. For people that lose more than 10% of their starting mass, the number who keep the weight off past 5 years is around 20%. So to be clear, for every 10,000 fatties like me that starts a lifestyle change today and manages to lose a big chunk of weight, in five years 8,000 of us will be near or above our starting weight - and weight cycling is actually worse for your cardiovascular health and bone density than maintaining a given weight.
'Successful' long term fat loss has been redefined to be meaningless, some studies have participants maintaining a 7.1kg loss after two years as success. Whoopty-fucking-do, sustaining a loss of 7.1kg would be a big deal if I was within 15kg of my ideal weight, but I'm not.
Now, I can predict your answer: the 80% of participants that failed just did a fad diet and stopped their healthy eating when they reached their target weight, and it's all their own fault. I knew that argument was coming, and it's bullshit. Every fat person knows the health benefits and social benefits of thinness, and if you interview 1000 people on a diet I guarantee damn near none of them plan to return to their old eating habits and exercise levels once they reach their target weight. I'm in my 40s and I have been hearing 'permanent lifestyle change' advice since I was a fat pre-teen.
A doctor that recommends a medical treatment that does more harm than good for 80% of the patients deserves to have their medical license revoked. Yet somehow 'diets' and 'permanent lifestyle changes' (which is another way of saying 'diets') are still prescribed every day to thousands of people.
Prove I'm wrong, show me studies with sustained fat loss of more than 10% of starting weight that are successful for more than 50% of patients over a two year time scale. Even better, find them with a five year time scale.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday June 13 2020, @07:13PM (4 children)
For whatever this is worth, 6 years ago I was 202 lb at 5'10" and today I'm at or just below 150. I've dropped like 6 sizes and can see every last rib and my hip bones. And I've been here for about 2 years. What did it for me is a short (~6 months) course of keto, followed by strict 18/6 intermittent fasting and calorie counting since then.
It's hard, and the only reason I've been able to pull this off is I've got the kind of stubborn willpower you could bend a titanium girdle around. But it feels so much better, people treat me better and take me more seriously, and knowing I'll live longer and have fewer health problems makes this all worth it by itself. Try intermittent fasting and see if it helps!
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @09:59PM (3 children)
That's damn impressive - no sarcasm. I've got four kids under age 18, a wife with some chronic (but thankfully not life-threatening) health issues that leave me doing most of the housework, cooking, and grocery shopping, and a day job that's medium stress. It's possible - but knowing myself, not that likely - I could match your willpower and discipline if I was single, or maybe in a relationship with someone in good health and with no children or with adult children. As it is, no chance. And I wouldn't be surprised if you've also got a relationship or kids or family members to care for or a harder job than mine or other health issues of your own or all five of those things together. In other words, I'm not trying to assert that you must have stayed thin because your life is easier. I'm just saying that I personally would need a much easier life to manage it.
My father, my mother-in-law, and my father-in-law all slimmed down substantially once they retired and have kept the weight off for years. I think I might be able to do the same if I manage to survive the intervening 25 years and if I had enough savings to actually retire. That's not guaranteed.
I'm 6', 275, I drink about 80 calories per day in the form of almond milk in my coffee (I'm allergic to dairy), and I eat a good amount of fruits, veggies, and lean meats. But I have a big appetite, and each of the five times I took off 20+ pounds since age 11 I just got successively hungrier each day until I ate enough to gain it back. I have a pretty good exercise routine, but it's not enough to offset my calorie intake.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2020, @05:15AM (2 children)
The hunger is a good reason to start off any diet change with a 1-2 day fast to "reset". Just reducing the amount of food without a fast will drain your willpower much more, as your body is expecting what it normally gets.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2020, @10:09PM (1 child)
Thanks for that, but again - I've done it many times before. The hunger adjusts downward the third or fourth day into calorie restriction, and everything is fine for a few months. The pounds melt off, it's not even that hard. Then somewhere in the 20-25 pound loss mark, the hunger starts creeping back and keeps incrementing upwards day after day until my willpower runs out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2020, @01:38AM
Get more fats in your diet. Cut carbs and sugars to keep the calories down. The hunger you feel when you are not getting enough fat is akin to the thirst a vampire feels. It will just keep building until you eat enough fat. Doctors' recommendations to "cut fat" and "lo-fat" foods are responsible for a large part of the obesity epidemic.
Similarly with the bullshit about salt. 10% of people need to watch their salt intake. Everybody else just pisses out the excess. Trouble is that 10% have such a bad reaction that statistically salt looks really bad.
"Too much salt and 10% of people get really high blood pressure! Strokes!! Heart attacks!! Everybody should cut their salt intake"
In reality, 100% of 10% will get really high blood pressure. 90% are fine.