I was just wondering what percentage of obese people actually have glandular or genetic problems, as opposed to those who are overweight because of their dietary habits and/or lack of exercise. Have there been any studies on this topic in the United States?
All obesity is because of dietary habits and lack of excercise required for that person. Glandular and/or genetic problems can affect what’s considered a suitable diet and suitable amount of excercise for that person, though. But the root cause is still too many calories and/or not enough excersise.
It’d be hard to distinguish. If a person has “fat” genes and bad eating habits, then you can’t say that the fatness is because of one or the other. The only way to make such a study is to do a gene analysis of every single non-fat person and ask whether there are more (people with “fat” genes who aren’t fat) or (people with bad eating habits who aren’t fat).
It is hard to quantify. If a person has a major defect in the gene that codes for leptin they can easily reach 500 pounds. However alot of obese people you see in the street do not have a major leptin deficiencies, but they probably have a variety of minor biochemical attributes that makes their ‘natural’ weight stabalize at what would be considered overweight.
For example here is a study showing that sleep deprivation causes obesity. The more deprived you are the more your leptin & ghrelin hormones (which have a role in bodyfat) get mucked up, and the more obese you get.
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1104/188125.html
Those who get less than 4 hours sleep a night have obesity rates 73% higher than those in the 7-9 hour a night group. If a person saw one of those 73% in the street they may be disgusted but its really just a lack of sleep. But does lack of sleep count as a glandular problem since it messes up the glandular system?
There are probably other studies out there I’m sure showing a difference between obese and thin people’s physiologies. I remember reading one once about leptin levels being higher in obese people but them having leptin resistance.
And even the definition of obesity is not really quantitative . Its easy to just say ‘30 BMI or higher’ but obesity is at the core of it just being fatter than what is considered average or attractive. There are alot of people who can eat whatever they want and maintain 8% bodyfat levels.
Here’s a review which says that fat mass is about 40 to 70% heritable depending on the study (height is 75-90% heritable for comparison). They calculate these figures through twin studies (seeing how much more similar identical twins are compared to fraternal twins in their fat distribution). There have been *tons * of studies (you can look in the bibliography to find some of them).
Of course if you restricted the calories enough for any human you could prevent them from being fat. But if you think about it, you could prevent a child from becoming really tall by controlling their diet too, so that fact alone doesn’t discount the impact of genes. Also the big problem is that most of the obesity genes found so far regulate weight by regulating food intake, which makes it a bit tricky to pick apart genetic vs. dietary variables. Somebody may be fat because they’re eating like a pig, but they may be eating like a pig because their genes push them to.
This is correct.
People have been arguing for decades about the influence of genes, psychology, physiology, etc. on obesity. IANAMD, but it’s my understanding that these factors do not in-and-of-themselves cause weight gain; weight gain can only be caused by consuming too many calories and/or not burning enough calories.
Things like genes, psychology, physiology, etc. might cause a person to eat more than they should, but it is the overeating and/or lack of exercise that directly causes obesity…
The problem is the question is a little meaningless since if genes control weight largely through diet regulation, then you can’t say which causes obesity - genes OR eating. Genes—>eating—>fat
I’m still not sure what is meant by ‘genetic/glandular disorders’ or ‘obesity’. With glandular disorders you could probalby include virtually every obese person alive. Their internal biochemistry propels them to have a bodyfat percentage that is higher than average. I doubt there are many people whose internal biochemistry tells them to be 100 pounds thinner than they are but who manage to force feed themselves into obesity. Maybe a handful, but that is it.
Ultimately it’s a metabolic heat equation, but between the simplistic view of the human body as a big bottle of hot water, and how people actually become substantially overweight it’s not a simple issue of people mindlessly stuffing their faces. Increasing obesity in modern societies is the result of a complex interplay between the nature and volume of available food resources, changing living patterns reducing everyday exercise levels to bare minimums, and how the brain-body deals with homeostasis and appetite regulation.
People who are, or who have been, substantially overweight (and I count myself in that cohort) are neuro-chemically continually pushed to eat beyond simple physical satiation. There’s a difference between basic physical hunger and the nagging “ghost hunger” (for lack of a better terms) that tugs at, and pushes, the consumption impulses of most obese people.
It doesn’t go away, you can’t ignore it, and people who aren’t subject to it really have no idea what obese people are having to fight 24/7. You can utilize eating strategies that control these impulses to a degree and allow you to lose weight, but it takes vigilance, meal planning and constant denial of the impulse to eat. It’s basically a pain in the ass, and understandably many people find it easier to give in and stop fighting. So yes, physically it is “eat less and exercise more” for the vast majority of overweight obese people, but actually controlling the complex of brain-body impulses, behaviors and lifestyle issues that make one tend to be obese is very, very difficult.
What I was asking was how many people become overweight despite having a reasonably healthy diet, versus those who wouldn’t necessarily become overweight on a healthy diet but became obese from pigging out on fast food and the like.
Yes. We are in agreement.
But does that mean I can throw up my hands and proclaim, “It’s not my fault I’m fat. My genes are telling me to eat!”
I used to be fat. I was fat because I overate. I overate because something in me (my genes, or my brain, or whatever) told me to eat more than I should.
Today I am not fat. Yet I still have the same genes and the same body. And they’re still telling me to “eat, eat, EAT!”
I have remained thin for the past 10 years because I refuse to “give in to the demands” of my genes. It’s a constant, daily struggle. It has taken an extraordinary amount of willpower, but I have won the game.
This has lead to some Undeniable Truths[sup]TM[/sup]:
-
Regardless of anything else, if you are fat, it is because you eat too much and/or you do not burn enough calories. Period.
-
Genes, physiology, psychology, metabolism rate, etc. do not directly affect your weight. But they can affect your appetite and efficiency of burning calories. None-the-less, you are fat because you eat too much and/or you do not burn enough calories. Period.
-
Regardless of your genes, physiology, psychology, metabolism rate, etc., you can always lose weight if you have enough discipline and willpower.
What’s a reasonably healthy diet? In principal I don’t see any reason why the same diet over a decade couldn’t make one person emaciated, another person normal weight, and the next person morbidly obese. That’s because there is a relatively large variation in individuals’ daily energy expenditure (both resting metabolism and exercise). On the other hand it theoretically takes relatively little excess daily caloric intake to produce a large gain in weight over time. Food intake versus energy expenditure actually has to be very tightly controlled by the brain/body because of that mathematical reality.
Think about it. In a highly simplified model, where 3200 excess calories consumed equates to one pound of fat. If you have one person who expends 100 calories more than his neighbor a day, they could eat the same diet and the first person could gain about 12 pounds extra per year. Over a decade he could become a morbidly obese 120 pounds overweight and the other person could be normal weight.
That doesn’t answer your question, of course, but I hope it helps define the problem. The real answer is, if you’re gaining weight, then genes or no genes, your diet must be unreasonable for you. (Unless of course you want to gain weight).
We mostly agree except for this. Unfortunately that particular debate turns practically metaphysical and I really don’t want to turn this into an IMHO or a GD or a BBQ so I won’t pursue. Also I argued it in another thread. But it’s all good, the issue makes all the difference if you’re assigning blame, but from a practical point of view isn’t much relevant, and from a factual perspective is basically unanswerable.
Yeah but that is like saying no matter how genetically prone to depression you are you can overcome it with positive thinking. Or no matter how prone to cancer you are you can overcome it with healthy living.
No… those are illnesses that thinking doesn’t solve. Obesity is not the result of an illness. Compulsive eating may be an illness that causes obesity, but regardless of how anyone and everyone can possibly sugar coat the situation, the equation is simple:
calories-in less calories-burned equals excess calories equals FAT.
This applies to “thin” people too, if they were to consume more calories than they burn.
Not necessarily. There are large individual variations in how well people store excess calories as fat. Some people would have to overeat by a very large amount to get fat, and some wouldn’t.
I would tend to agree with ultrafilter… it’s hard to believe that every human is identically efficient at extracting calories from food. There is large variation even with droppings from the same organism. The calories from feces, urine, and gas must be factored in. So, the equation would be “calories-in less calories-burned & calories-out”.
The " it’s all about calories in and out as part of a thermodynamic equation" position while correct in an absolute physical sense, doesn’t get at the behavioral roots of why some people tend to overeat and some don’t which is the main genesis of obesity in most cases.
Some people apparently think obese people are scratching their heads like the village idiot about why they are fat so a caloric lecture is necessary. It’s not a mystery to most fat people. They are perfectly well aware why they are fat. The difficulty is in controlling and moderating the strong and continuous impulses in which their brain-body chemistry is pushing them to overeat.
Oh, I agree. But the OP is looking for an absolute root cause type of answer, and all of the justifications in world isn’t going to change the fact that it’s calories in being higher than calories out. Not trying to be insensitive to obese folks – I’m almost there myself, and as you say, I know why.
Though true, this doesn’t help much. It is equally true to say "You can always hold your breath until you pass out if you have enough discipline and willpower. " Yet it does not follow that it is possible for everybody to hold their breath until they pass out. Willpower is not some unlimited resource that a person has, it too is controled and determined by our genetic and enviromental situation.
But that’s just the crux of it. The word “justification” implies that’s there some sort of quasi-lightweight, self deluding argument that obese people are using as an avoidance mechanism for dealing with the results of overeating. The issues of trying to wrangle and negotiate with an over active appetite are not “justifications” they are hard, cold facts on the ground for obese people. You might not be able to smell them, see them or touch them, but the impulses to overeat are living , active “real” things to them that they have to deal with.
It’s like saying to a Tourettes sufferer that their messed up brain wiring is a “justification” for their disease.