Obesity Contagious? 840
An anonymous reader writes "University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers have found that certain human viruses may cause obesity, and by extension make being severely overweight a contagious condition. 'It makes people feel more comfortable to think that obesity stems from lack of control,' the lead researcher says. 'It's a big mental leap to think you can catch obesity.' But other diseases once chalked up to environmental factors, like stomach ulcers, are now known to stem from infectious agents."
Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:3, Insightful)
- Peter in Wasted Talent
Beer and cheese must not fall under the Atkins diet
Looks like those 'sconnies found an excuse
Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:5, Funny)
or perhaps (Score:5, Funny)
Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Insightful)
What they will conveniently forget is convervation of energy: The only way someone can gain weight is by eating too much, compared to how much energy their bodies spend on moving and keeping you alive. End of discussion.
No matter which disease one may have, you will not catch 25 pounds from taking a stroll through the mall or, say, through breathing thin air. If a disease lowers the energy requirements of the body, the cure is to eat proportionally less.
TFA isn't clear on this, but I wonder precisely what is suggested being the cause of obesity in 'infected' individuals. Are they saying people simply become unable to control the urge to eat uncontrolled amounts of unhealthy foods?
So how do you catch 'soccer moms', no bikes as kids, McD dinners and no exercise in school?
Also strange is the fact that ulcers were commonplace all over the world, due to often being an infectious disease. Yet I wonder why the Europeans haven't 'caught' obesity on the US level yet? It is not like we haven't been mingling with them for, say, a few hundred years.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Insightful)
[snip]
If a disease lowers the energy requirements of the body, the cure is to eat proportionally less.
For some people "too much" food might be just enough to nourish them. It's not widely reported, but lots of dieting fat people die and/or suffer severe health problems from malnutrition every year. Still fat, yet starved of required nutrients.
We've tried bullying fat people to "quit eating so much and go for a walk" for decades now. Results have not been stellar. Maybe we ought to try something else. Maybe it might be worth a shot to afford them the dignity of any other human beings, and find ways to help them get thinner.
It's not like fat people want to be fat. You can't even make the case that the pleasures of eating and relaxation (or avoiding the discomfort of working out and going hungry) are more important to them than their health and appearance. There are people who are suicidal over their weight, and willing to endure painful, dangerous, ill-advised medical procedures to correct it.
Something is clearly wrong with these people, whether it's psychological or physiological. Instead of mockingly call them out for being less wonderful than you (when, for all you know, you would fair far worse if cursed with their metabolism), how about we try to find a solution.
In spite of how much the results of studies like this might displease the "personal responsibility uber alles" crowd, I'm glad studies like this are being done. If there really does turn out to be a viral cause, discovery of it is cause for celebration.
Science before dogma.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Interesting)
But eating fresh non processed foods and getting daily exercise is healthy for anyone.
Obesity in the US is becoming a public health emergency. Did you see the 6 day series in the New York Times about Type II diabetes? It showed some people who couldn't stop eating junk food, even though it would mean they would lose a foot or go blind...
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Insightful)
I put more miles on a bicyle in a month than I'm betting most of you do in a year, I work out regularly and have developed a liking for yoga. Still fat, but I start a long-term diet program on Monday (after the trip out to see Kevin Smith talk in Indy) which will likely help take off unwanted pounds.
My point? We're all individuals. Some folks are fat; some are thin. Some folks want to blame someone/thing else for lifes woes; some don't. Some folks are fat for medical conditions beyond their control; some folks are fat because chicken wings is tasty. Whatever...it's individual and statements such as "Something is clearly wrong with these people" piss me off.
Dave
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:3)
Relax. You said yourself that you are healthy and happy with your current weight, so you are clearly not in the group of which I was speaking (those who are dangerously obese in spite of a continuing and ongoing struggle not to be.)
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:4, Insightful)
Vitamin pills?
We've tried bullying fat people to "quit eating so much and go for a walk" for decades now
Funny, that's how I lost over 100 pounds. (Five pounds a month for 20 months in a row.)
It works. Mostly the part about eating less. I got the idea when I realized that the Ethiopians who died in that famine didn't look so thin because they got too much exercise.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:3, Interesting)
[puts on pro dog breeder hat] D
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and the solution to kick heroin is to stop shooting up, but even if you TYPE IT IN ALL CAPS, a junkie is still going to need more help then you shouting at them.
Re:nope (Score:5, Insightful)
You completely missed my point.
Telling people to "stop eating and exercise more" appears to be reducing obesity about as well as telling junkies to quit cold turkey reduces heroin use. In other words, almost not at all.
I'm with the other poster who suggested that all of you shouting "it's fatso's fault that he's fat" without considering the evidence are just as bad as the ID people who refuse to even consider the evidence.
TFA is about a study which says there might be a viral pathology which is contributing to obesity, if not outright causing it in some cases. Since this shakes up the world-view of some of you, you're stamping your feet and throwing a tantrum over it.
Sorry if this new science is showing that you might not automatically be better people that those who are fatter than you, but I'm going to side with the guys in the lab-coats on this debate.
Re:nope (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:nope (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, Alcoholics Anonymous has an over all going rate of exactly the same as those going cold turkey... it's somewhere around 5%. It's the same for smoking also.
Fact is that every addiction is hard to get off of, but whether "help" is supplied or not, the quitting rates are the same over time.
So, the issue becomes, we can't just tell fatties to lay off the donuts, because they won't, even though they may know they should. They could "stop" cold turkey, and try and fix it, but this leads to a "defficiency" that they try and account for the next time they stop quitting. Same as with alcoholics. Eventually, this cycle brings it self out so that they're binging hard, and having a rollercoaster of effects because of it.
My issue here is that we tell people to get a doctors advice before going on a diet, because the cause of the weight may not be within their control (a virus that would cause a store of fat regardless of their intake) or something entirely unhealthy for them (a 90lb 16 year old going "Look at my pot belly, I'm a fat little pig.")
In either of those cases, a doctors input is invaluable. In some/most cases though, it's entirely possible that just "quitting" "cold turkey" would work as well as anything else, the person "just" has to muster the willpower to to break the addiction.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Insightful)
Quick question: Did you feel sorry for the major Type A personality business person who ended up in the hospital due to a severe ulcer? Was it their fault they got one from working too hard and being too stressed?
Do you feel differently now that ulcers have been linked to bacteria and not environment?
How many people here point and laugh at anyone who belives in ID instead of real science, but in this case are basing their comments on their BELIEFS about obesity and not looking at the very interesting science these researchers are doing.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact is that real science exists, and it clearly shows that
a) Obesity is a chronic health condition
b) Treatment is available and the most effective method (statistically) requires the individual to.. you know. Exercise and eat healthy.
c) Any reduction in weight, regardless of method, has a direct correlation with reduced risk of comorbid disease.
That "very interesting science" is being done does not conflict with existing medical and scientific wisdom.
The only similarity I see to ID is believing that (previously) unexplained exceptions invalidate the general conclusion. IE, "There's no evolutionary ancestor known for the platypus, so evolution is false" = "A virus is common among obese persons, so personal habits must not be the cause."
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:4, Interesting)
Bzzzt wrong answer. The stressed excutive with an ulcer can be cured.
See: http://nobelprize.org/medicine/laureates/2005/pre
You see, those guys proved that the prevailing 'wisdom' about ulcers related to stress and lifestyle were FALSE. That in most ulcer cases, there was a bacteria causing the ulcers to arize. Getting rid of the bacteria actually cured the ulcers. The Type A with an ulcer needs nothing more than medicine to cure their condition - A career change is not necessary.
But you provided a great example of how hard society holds onto its stereotypes for certain conditions.
Nowhere in my posts did I insuate that obesity was purely a disease, that has a cure and that better diet and exercise aren't good things. But in light of what was learned about ulcers, shouldn't scientists sometimes challenge the conventional wisdom? Who knows, someday maybe the people studying links between obesity and viruses might earn a nobel prize!
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is also what is leading nutrition experts to question the portayal of obesity in and of itself as a health risk. It's just not the case that being over a certain weight means you are at risk for disease, it's an indicator that you will want to monitor certain things perhaps, but at the end of the day, skinny or fat, if you binge on sugar, you are at risk for diabetes.
Re:Conservation of energy revoked? (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless you are an expert on human metabolism, you cannot possibly make such an assertion. And if you were, you wouldn't.
What you overlook is that human beings are animals, and hence complex biochemical factories, not simple heat engines. If you know how much petrol a car engine of a given capacity burns in a given time, you know how much energy it produces, right? (Even this is only broadly true). But animals are very inefficient converters of energy. I forget how much of the energy we use gets "wasted" as heat, but it's a large fraction. (Just as well, or we'd die of hypothermia). Other energy goes into running various chemical reactions, not all of which are necessarily indispensable or even useful.
As soon as you think about if for a few seconds, it's clear that the body has a lot of discretion in just how it uses the 200 calories you get from, say, eating a bun. These viruses could jam the "make fat" control hard over against the end stop.
Maybe you think it is fine for one person to eat 2900 calories a day, do little exercise, and stay thin; while another person eats 2000 calories, walks six miles and gains weight. But how is the second person going to control their weight in the long run? The only practical way we have of controlling calorie intake is our appetite. Have you ever tried measuring your exact calorie intake while eating a normal diet? It's far from easy. Moreover, how are people to know how much they should be eating, if it's 2000 for one person and 3000 for someone else of similar size, shape, and exercise habits? We can't all become dietary scientists, walking about with computers and clipboards, weighing every bite of food we eat.
Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:3, Informative)
Which one are you discussing?
--
Evan
Re:Peter Griffin on Wisconsin (Score:4, Funny)
I imagine most of have had a roll in the old hay with a "pleasantly plump" female after one too many brewskis...
Common viruses to look out for... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Common viruses to look out for... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Common viruses to look out for... (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps because the linked article was a blog...
Study on rhesus monkeys and marmosets. [nutrition.org]
"In study 1, we observed spontaneously occurring Ad-36 antibodies in 15 male rhesus monkeys, and a significant longitudinal association of positive antibody status with weight gain and plasma cholesterol lowering during the 18 mo after viral antibody appearance. In study 2, which was a randomized controlled experiment, three male marmosets inoculated with Ad-36 had a threefold body weight gain, a greater fat gain and lower serum cholesterol relative to baseline (P 0.05) than three uninfected controls at 28 wk postinoculation. These studies illustrate that the adiposity-promoting effect of Ad-36 occurs in two nonhuman primate species and demonstrates the usefulness of nonhuman primates for further evaluation of Ad-36-induced adiposity."
Re:Doubtful and absurd: (Score:5, Insightful)
Ultimately, body chemistry determines what percentage of calories are stored as fat, and what percentage are eliminated. There are cases of obese people starving themselves to death while remaining obese. Sometimes the body just malfunctions.
It seems like you feel a strong need to force your values on others.
Careful which Pounds You Measure (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Doubtful and absurd: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Doubtful and absurd: (Score:4, Insightful)
The other point is that the known solutions to obesity are a response to the known causes. Nobody would think to prescribe antiviral drugs to someone who suddenly starts gaining weight without a recognizable cause (like change in diet/activity) if we didn't suspect viruses as a possible cauese of obesity (even if it is a relatively rare cause, at lest doctors might now know what special symptoms to look for).
I believe that .. (Score:2)
Doesnt this make us want to... (Score:3, Interesting)
this would increase the amount of discrimination cases against obese people dramatically
New Cartman saying.. (Score:4, Funny)
People are Obese regarless of Income or Geography (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:5, Interesting)
Look, the cause of obesity is really very simple: the human body (and its ancestors) evolved in environments in which food was scarce, and during that time mechanisms came into being which helped to deal with that scarcity. As a result, it has built-in mechanisms to ensure that there will be sufficient energy store for the body to use for all but the most drastic of food shortages. These mechanisms include the fat store, the tendency for fat to accumulate much more easily than it's used, and an appetite control mechanism that encourages overeating (since who knows when the next meal will become available?).
Now take the human body and put it into an environment where all the food one could ever want is easily available for the taking (all it requires is a small amount of money). What do you expect will happen?
Well, duh...the body will behave as it always has: under the assumption that while food might be plentiful now, it's not likely to be plentiful for long, so better stock up now while it can.
And thus, obesity.
And the reason obesity is so difficult to deal with, and why sustained weight loss has such a lousy track record (95%+ failure rate), is simple: to fight obesity, you have to fight your own body's instinctive drive to "save up for a rainy day".
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:4, Interesting)
Bushmen do get to walk around a bit more. They're more akin to modern people that would have to walk to the corner grocery on a daily basis. Bushmen still tend to setup camp where the food is. They're not going to waste calories going too and fro when they can just move their hovels over to the next grove or whatnot.
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:5, Funny)
I had to chase down a hot dog vendor today and throw spears at him before he'd stop to sell me a Chicago dog with everything and an icy cold Coca-Cola. Does that count?
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm surprised that after reading all the comments nobody has said anything about soda. Calories from soda are huge. A 2L bottle of soda runs about 2000 calories. If you have your main liquid consumption from soda you're probably drinking about 2 of these a week.
Switch over to water (0 calories), and you'll drop 4000 calories/week out of your diet instantly. That's almost 600 calories a day. It will make a difference. Get a Brita if you can't stand the taste of tap water, buy bottled water if you must spend money on your beverages.
But don't complain to me about being fat and then go grab the Big Gulp of Coke. You won't get any sympathy here.
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:5, Insightful)
Food used to be fairly simple. Thousands of years of grains/meats/herbs combined with moderately low heat on an individual basis. Modern food processing (for those of us that eat in such countries) involves food processes, chemicals, and techniques that we certainly did not evolve for. High fructose corn syrup in almost everything (hamburger buns? WTF?), foods created by superheating and injecting gases, and foods assembled in a laboratory are definately a curve ball.
I doubt anyone would drink soda if they actually had to form it from its core components. I can handle cooking steak, pastries, etc. I know how to grow/hunt the ingredients for most foods. Where does one hunt the wild aspartame? How do you go about making msg? If you had to do it in your kitchen, would you even bother?
Also, my pet theory is that humans are designed to be social eaters (sharing the kill, the harvest, etc). Company makes foods better. Ever smell a McDonald's burger that smells as good as a backyard barbecue one? Now, however, a lot of people wolf down their food by themselves in the car, or while working. They don't stop to pay attention to it, and they also frequently ingest several hundred calories of soda while eating.
Just my two bits.
-WS
MSG (Score:4, Informative)
It's not that hard.. glutamate is naturally present in many foods such as parmesan cheese, asparagus, peas, and tomatoes, and monosodium glutamate (MSG) is simply a form of glutamate that's easy to package and cook with. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], MSG was first discovered in crystals left behind after evaporating kombu broth, which is a common Japanese soup stock [seaweed.net] made by heating seaweed in water. Making MSG in your own kitchen is probably easier than making baking soda, sugar, table salt, and many other basic ingredients.
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:3, Funny)
Depression, with a corresponding lack of appetite? Such people have always been with us. Genetic.
Then there're people in the world who have to spend a lot of their income on food, so they're careful about what and how much they eat.
There're people who have found better things to do than eat?
There're people who just have been brought up eating soyburgers and vitamins. THEY'RE depressing. They're so healthy that they glow in the dark.
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, this contributes to diabetes, IIRC. Basically, big sugar highs and lows screw up the natural insulin-based sugar regulation system until it finally just stays broken no matter what you do.
Re:And eventually... (Score:3, Insightful)
Right.
"Take a moment to train yourself..." Please. You've got to be kidding me.
Re:There's a feedback system. Virus affects it... (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, its funny. There are people like this - honestly like this - they have things like Pradr Willis syndrome and are incredibly rare. They're also unfortunate and tend to die at very young ages.
There are also people like you and me. Heck, I was a chubby kid; I was a fat adult. I was obese, and then some. I enjoyed food and took comfort in the fact that while I was "a bit overweight" at 240+ lbs (I'm 6' tall) I wasn't really any fatter than many of the people around me. Then one day I looked in the mirror and saw that my 38" pants were getting tight, and said, basically, "Hey, I'm fat."
I started to exercise, watched what I ate (a bit), and I've lost almost 80 lbs. I never thought I was obese, but anyone who can lose 80 lbs (without getting down to a "washboard abs" level of body fat, mind you, just a moderately healthy weight) is, by definition, obese. Or was, in my case.
For me, and for many, many other people I've met, its purely about self-control and body image. And its something that they, as I, can do something about. Yes, there are some people with severe medical issues that cause their obesity but if you're reading this and you're fat, chances are really really high that its because you're inactive and like eating, not that you've got some rare disorder. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Pity those who have uncontrollable ilnesses. Don't be an enabler for the vast majority who don't.
Re:Rubbish food is expensive (Score:3, Interesting)
Funny thing (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the availability of junk food and the national automobile culture.
Re:Funny thing (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Interesting)
When I was living in Europe, specifically Germany, people viewed someplace that took half-an-hour away as pretty long and a city 2 hours away as a "trip". It was the norm to be able to work/bike to the local grocery store 5-15 minutes away (for that mode of transport) and get what you need. For work, lots of people took the train, which also required walking.
Holland is even greater in bike usage.
Part of the reason that Europe has everything close together is that stores, restaurants, etcetera can be comfortably intermingled amoung the neighborhoods. The only thing I saw zoned "away" from other things was industrial.
In America, rural zoning tends to be much more isolationist - suburbs are islands to themselves - without a store in sight. It's quite depressing actually. It also leads to the "not being able to walk or bike anywhere" syndrome.
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Insightful)
... and also quite dangerous. The entire economy and even basic survival hinges on those service station pumps never running dry. I don't see how the US could survive another 70s style oil embargo given the incredible suburban expansion of the last 25 years.
Re:Funny thing (Score:3, Insightful)
The solution is to either lower your expectation for housing, or get another job, not to act like the situation is outside your control.
Your really have no idea what you are talking about do you? Sure, he could pack his bags, move to middle America where the number one employer is WalMart and find a nice trailer park to raise his family, or he can get a good job in a city, buy a nice home in the suburbs, (housing in the city might not be a place to raise your kids) and deal with the drive. You are rather
Re:Funny thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Funny thing (Score:3)
Me, I happen to live six blocks from work, but wouldn't mind a longer commute to a better job
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Contrast that with America, where many technology parks and shopping centers don't even have proper sidewalks, and where the fastest, cheapest food you can get is at McDonalds, and it's no wonder Americans are fat.
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Where I live I feel like I'm in the minority of people at a healthy weight. In NYC, I'm the norm. But then, there are many restuarants in the city with healthy food that tastes good (we ate at an amazing vegan place this weekend, Angelica Kitchen. It's on 12th St between 1st and 2nd Ave. Worth the wait if there is one!)
Re:Funny thing (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Funny thing (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Funny thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Virus Warning (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Virus Warning (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, but you'll develop
What the hell, Mr. Insensitive? What are you trying to say?
I can vouch for that! (Score:2)
I live in Wisconsin and that virus must be all over the place judging from the amount of obesity here! Flamebait me if you will, but it's pretty bad here!
http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]Everything is contagious, in the social sense (Score:5, Interesting)
There are some staggering data in there regarding the extent to which humans mimic the behavior of similar others. For example, there are statistically significant increases in the number of teenage-couples killed in car accidents among those teenage-couples who recently heard about accidents where teenage couples were killed. The increase is not observed in teenage-couples who didn't hear about the recent accidents, and is not observed among singleton teenagers or older couples who have been exposed to the news. These results have been repeated with a wide range of demographic groups, on a wide range of phenomena, and have been found to be consistent and strong. Hmm, notice a rash of mine accidents recently? Yes, I'm sure it's media focus-bias to some extent...
I really urge you to check that book out if you're interested in the instinct-level mental processes that control us without our being aware of them, or if you want to be..ah...evil?
Re:Everything is contagious, in the social sense (Score:5, Insightful)
That's why, though, that we do double-blind studies, and tests on animals.
I doubt the animals in the study were susceptible to suggestion - yet the ones with one of the virii did indeed become more obese.
Taught early -- in daycare? (Score:5, Interesting)
We got immediate "feedback" from the staff about "cutting" his intake. I had to explain to them that it was actually a net increase for daytime feeding (16 vs. 12 oz) and his overall intake was actually up by 4 oz. They politely disagreed and we said we'd change it back if problems arose. After a week it was a non-issue.
After thinking about it, I realized what the real issue was -- the staff liked to feed him more frequently and we believed they were actually using the feeding as a way to soothe him; the feeding times for the bottles varied quite a bit. By cutting him to two bottles a day, they were "losing" a soothing option.
It was then that I started thinking about the staff; all of them would qualify as overweight, three of them would probably qualify as obese and one of them probably is pushing the morbidly obese standard.
I started wondering if the childhood obesity phenomenon couldn't partly be traced to daycare; at an early age, if given the opportunity, the staff will use food the way they probably use it themselves -- as a way to soothe and manage anxiety.
I'm probably stretching this a lot, but it doesn't seem entirely unrealistic. Kids in increasingly large numbers since the 1970s have been put into daycares, and they've been subjected to food as a behavior modifier -- soothing babies, calming toddlers, and so on. The fact that daycare providers are, by and large, at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder probably also means that the kids are being subjected to the caregivers own poor habits as well.
I know there are other influences (TV, advertising, parental disregard, etc), but I do wonder if bad food choices in daycare doesn't lay the groundwork for a fairly deep-seated set of food/emotion connections that play out as the child gets older and has more opportunity to make their own food choices.
Virus or no (Score:5, Interesting)
Despite my attempts to keep this comment civil, I'm sure some will take offense...
Re:Virus or no (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that I don't have the time to put out the energy (of all kinds) that weight loss requires. I work two jobs (one for God, and one for currency) and at the end of the day I'm /tired/, and I simply don't have the energy to ask myself how many calories my dinner has. I just want to eat something and collapse on the account.
The real bottom line of this article, along with related research into Syndrome X, etc. is that me and people like me are placed at an enormous disadvantage because, due to genetics or a virus or whatever, we are handicapped when it comes to weight loss. It's not that we are physiologically impossible to reduce eating, but that everything in our culture works against it and it just becomes too much damned hassle.
Our society makes allowances for people with other sorts of handicaps -- e.g. wheelchair ramps. Should we also make allowances for people with lousy metabolisms? For example ... why shouldn't restaraunt chains be required to provide calorie counts on a meal, printed on the menu? All the fast food places already do this, but you have to ask for it, and it's much harder to get this information "on the fly" for non fast-food restaraunts. This information would would be especially helpful if it included the Glycemic Index [wikipedia.org].
Re:Virus or no (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that you can lose weight, someone in a wheelchair cannot grow legs/nerves/bones (or whatever else is preventing them from being able to walk). You said yourself it wouldn't be easy to lose weight, but it is possible. For better or worse, your weight is your responsibility. It is inappropriate for you to expect society to conform to your needs. It's different when someone cannot change their condition, which is why we (try to) make things easier for the lame, the blind, the deaf, and, of course, Pamela Anderson.
Re:Virus or no (Score:4, Insightful)
Put yourself first and good luck!
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Virus or no (Score:3, Informative)
As an agnostic myself, I don't see why the mere mention of God should trigger you to go into attack mode. The man's religion is not the issue.
The other thing that bothers me greatly about your post, is the usu
Just How Often? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does anybody have pointers to numbers for the other two viruses?
Viruses aren't the only medical condition that can cause obesity, by the way. Various hormonal problems (thyroid comes to mind) can cause obesity as well. Even so, I'm expecting that they'll still find tha more than half of North American obesity is not environment related (other than an environment with an abundance of food).
Interesting as a possible side cause (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Genetics
2. Environment
3. Disease
Someone who is prone to ulcers (genetics) and works as a stock trader on the floor of Wall Street and doesn't eat well/doesn't exercise (environment) and catches the right germ (disease) is more likely to come down with an ulcer than the sheep herder in Wyoming who's only worry is someone using the word "brokeback" to them.
The same thing could be here. I know people who have struggled with their weight - they exercise, they try to eat well, and yet the pounds don't come off. Perhaps, like ulcers, there can be a simple protein check before dieting and exercise of "OK - looks like you have the virus. Let's clear that up while we change your eating and exercise habits", which will give many people hope before they have to resort to surgery.
Hopefully it won't just be an excuse for the lazy, like the Wall Street trader who'd rather take a pill for the ulcer rather than taking time out to go relax with their family and loved ones.
Now, with that said, I'm heading out and getting a whopper
Sedentary Nerd + Fried Carbs + Beer = Fat Nerd (Score:3, Funny)
Sure, wash your hands and reduce your random virus exposure. But get up and move around a little without the bag of chips. That's what I say. Also, will someone come and help me out of this chair?
Of COURSE it's contagious... (Score:3, Funny)
Limited credibility. (Score:5, Insightful)
The two most common causes of obesity are compulsive overeating (which is an actual addition and can often only be effectively treated as such), and gratuitous overeating (where the person is just a slob). The latter is rarer than you might think, as being a slob is not much of a survival trait. Addictions, however, are often derived from survival traits. Severely deranged ones, but survival traits nonetheless.
Now, addictive behaviours can appear to be contageous, as extreme dysfunctions tend to create extreme stress in others, which can in turn cause those others to become dysfunctional themselves. (We're talking fairly extreme cases, here.) As such, any research that theorises pathogens must first eliminate acutely dysfunctional groups. Otherwise, you're going to end up chasing shadows.
Eliminating acutely dysfunctional researchers who are paid by corporate sponsors to achieve pre-defined results would also be a good idea, but that would eliminate 95% of all researchers, which could cause problems down the road.
Any new angle helpful (Score:3, Insightful)
infectious (Score:3, Funny)
It seems the poor and uneducated are most often afflicted. Regardless of your social standing, please do not assume that you are safe! Most doctors agree that the use of a condom may prevent your girlfriend or wife from contracting this horrible, disfiguring, disease.
Spread how? (Score:3, Funny)
-matthew
Many comments fit researchers' prediction (Score:3, Informative)
The point is the idea that obesity might not be something that you control really is frightening to us.
Contrary to what you guys are ranting... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is to say that some viruses might also be affecting this?
If some treatment can just help a person who has struggled against weight their whole life have a slightly easier struggle without harming their body in a more severe way then more power to them.
So by running... (Score:4, Funny)
Ha! (Score:3, Funny)
IT'S THE ALIENS THAT ARE DOING IT! (Score:4, Funny)
They're fattening up their cattle a.k.a. us!
I hear "Armageddon" means "Great Feast" in Gray.
Those skinny little bastards must be hungry! Look at 'em!
</conspiracy theory>
But the cause of being overweight is OBVIOUS! (Score:5, Insightful)
There was a time when illness was "obviously" the result of evil spirits playing havoc on people who were not devout enough. I'll bet at some point there were people standing around the village square commenting on how "if that fool had just spent a little more time praying than [insert sinful activity here], he obviously wouldn't be lying on the ground hacking up a lung and burning up from fever". Just because this line of research goes against what we believe to be common-knowledge isn't really a reason to jump all over it, we can be wrong.
So, no, it's clearly not an excuse to give up eating well or exercising, but I'm not going to just say there's nothing to this until there's been a bit more study.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yea right (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yea right (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yea right (Score:3, Interesting)
both good points. Sleep is always overlooked! Although the only real way to lose weight is eat less + exercise more, as someone who was once heavy then lost a significant amount of weight and kept it off it became clear that there isn't a linear relationship between effort and results.
At least for me there were certain "weight plateaus" where it took longer to lose 5 lbs than at other times. Conversely, once in a plateau it was relatively easy to stay there as it required a certain amount of effort to gai
There's no single answer for us all (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Eat less, exercise more! Guaranteed you'll lose weight!
2. Do you think fat people REALLY want to be fat? It's not their fault! It's their metabolisms (or a virus, perhaps)!
Call me crazy, but I think there's a bit of truth in BOTH statements.
Fact is, ON AVERAGE, the more you eat, the more weight you will gain. ON AVERAGE, the more exercise you get, the more weight you will lose. I can't see anyone disputing this, for the AVERAGE case. Hell, it really applies to everyone, but to differing degrees. Personally, I've been in both camps.
Some people burn as many calories as they intake, no matter what. I used to be one of them. 4000, 5000 calories a day, combined with sitting around watching TV, and I stayed incredibly slim. As I finally emerged from what seemed like 10 years of puberty, this changed, and changed a lot. Lately I can put a pound or two on per day, if I'm not careful. I have to be very careful in what I eat or I'll balloon up in a month - well, for someone of my weight it IS ballooning, anyway. However, I can still have weeks where I eat a ton of food, so long as I exercise myself silly. In my case, it's hiking 20kms up the side of a mountain. After that I can eat damn near everything in sight for a week. In the winter when I slow down, I have to eat a LOT less or the pounds pile on.
I think it's safe to say that most people are in a range from hummingbird to tortise when it comes to metabolism. The key is figuring out where you lie on that scale, and adjusting your habits accordingly. I know of people who will just put on fat forever. They need to eat very nutritious, low calorie foods, and get plenty of exercise in order to stay reasonably thin. Does it suck? Yup. Is it "unfair" that some people can eat whatever they want, whenever they want? Sure - but you're not going to get very far whining about it. There are some extreme cases of people who simply cannot do anything but gain weight - their bodies are totally out of whack. Seems to me that these people are in a very small minority though - or else obesity wouldn't be such a recent thing. You don't often see 400 lb people in poorer countries, for instance, and you sure didn't see many of them 100 years ago.
Some days I wish I was still 16, and could eat all the time. Then again, in those days I couldn't put on muscle to save my life, no matter what or how much I ate, or how much I exercised.
Long story short? Live with the cards you've been dealt, and know that it's actually OK to feel hungry sometimes. Far too many people insist on feeling very full after every meal - hell, after every hour for the extreme snackers out there.
Re:Yea right (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't hunt for my food. I don't make my own clothes. I use birth control. I have central heating. I shower every day. I take allergy medicine. I get flu shots and vaccines. I take pain killers when I hurt. I brush my teeth and go to the dentist. If my teeth fell out, I would get fake ones. If my arm was cut off, I would get a prosthetic. If I stepped on a rusty nail
Re:ha ha ha (Score:3, Funny)
"You're big-ASSED, okay? Dinosaurs are big-boned. Put the fork down!"
"I'm not actually overeating - I'm trying to keep the virus at bay!"
Arararararar!
Re:Obesity is NOT genetic! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Obesity comes from a simple condition... (Score:5, Insightful)
Different people output different amounts of energy. Some people burn hundreds of calories just sitting in front of the TV, because they are jittery. Others can work out every day and still just barely keep up with the caloric intake of a healthy diet.
If staying in shape comes relatively easy for you, I find it quite repugnant to ascribe the failure of less-lucky folk to stay skinny to some moral shortcoming.
And I'm saying this as somebody who runs 3-4 miles a day and drastically limits his sugar intake. For me, staying healthy is a part-time career that occupies a good chunk of my day. As hard as it is for me, I know for a fact that there are a lot of overweight people who could not possibly live my lifestyle. For one thing, their knees would cruble in a matter of weeks. For another, their various food cravings are a lot stronger than mine.
Maybe some of them can pull it off, but there are addictive drugs out there which have a better rate of recovery than obesity. Shouldn't we all consider that there may be more treatment required than shouting "stop being so lazy, fatty" at them?
Age is also a factor (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't run 3-4 miles a day, but I'm not a couch potato either. I take regular walks in the good weather, and use the stairs instead of the elevator, but it doesn't seem to help.
Re:Obesity comes from a simple condition... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Obesity comes from a simple condition... (Score:3, Funny)
I could introduce you to three from within my own personal circle of close friends. They work out as much as me (if not more) eat healtheir than me (and less of it) and are fatter than me... and I'm no ice-cream eating couch potato myself.
I'd address the rest of your post, but seeing as I just invalidated your whole point, I don't think I'll bother.
Re:Obesity comes from a simple condition... (Score:5, Informative)
For people without a medical condition that causes obesity, it is possible to take in fewer calories and run off of fat instead. But there are a number of medical conditions which can interfere with this process, which depends on a non-trivial cascade of signals between different organs (something has to detect that your blood sugar is low; it has to release a hormone in response; the fat cells have to respond to this hormone; they have to produce sugar from fat; the fat cells have to stop pulling sugar out of the bloodstream and storing the energy). This research found that some people are obese because of a particular virus. Of course, most of the people they looked at probably just eat too much, but not everybody.
Re:Viruses cannot cause obesity (Score:4, Informative)
Second, you can eat 3,000 kcal a day and still lose weight: exercising uses calories.
Third, whether or not you experience ill effects from your personal dieting strategy depends on genetic history, such as hypertension, cholesterol, diabetes, etc.