Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Medicine Science

Study: Body Weight Heavily Influenced By Heritable Gut Microbes 297

Posted by samzenpus from the passing-it-on dept.
FirephoxRising writes Our genetic makeup influences whether we are fat or thin by shaping which types of microbes thrive in our body, according to a new study. Scientists identified a specific, little known bacterial family that is highly heritable and more common in individuals with low body weight. So we are what we eat, and what we got from out parents. From the article: "The study, funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH), researchers sequenced the genes of microbes found in more than 1,000 fecal samples from 416 pairs of twins. The abundances of specific types of microbes were found to be more similar in identical twins, who share 100 per cent of their genes, than in non-identical twins, who share on average only half of the genes that vary between people. These findings demonstrate that genes influence the composition of gut microbes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Study: Body Weight Heavily Influenced By Heritable Gut Microbes More

Study: Body Weight Heavily Influenced By Heritable Gut Microbes

Comments Filter:

  • Oh no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) * on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:10AM (#48349143) Homepage Journal

    Here we go, endless posts about how it's all down to pure willpower and entirely the fault of the individual. Maybe we could try looking for more practical solutions and simply berating people this time?

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Here we go, endless posts about how it's all down to pure willpower and entirely the fault of the individual. Maybe we could try looking for more practical solutions and simply berating people this time?

      We could look at the first law of thermodynamics.

      • Re:Oh no (Score:5, Interesting)

        by orasio ( 188021 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:38AM (#48349249) Homepage

        That's what is being done nowadays, counting calories.

        The problem is that calorie consumption is not constant. It's more like household economy.

        If you earn (eat) a lot every day, you will probably end up with a lot of savings (belly fat).

        One way of getting rid of those savings (belly fat) is taking a lower paying job (dieting). The problem is that your savings don't magically dissappear, and you can make changes that allow you to keep your savings (fat), even with a lower income (daily calorie intake).

        Another way you can get rid of your savings is just spending more daily (like exercise). The problem is that, if you have a good enough income (daily intake), and sizable savings, you will only lose capital (weight) in the long run, no sizable short term effect.

        So, a fat person body works, in what respects to calories, like a financially savvy household. Going skinny would be like going broke. Some of us could benefit from a way to teach our bodies to do a bit worse in the calorie finance department. Could be a lot easier than just dieting, exercising or both.

        • Re:Oh no (Score:4, Insightful)

          by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:47AM (#48349301)
          This is why I think exercising is so essential to maintaining a healthy weight. Because living without calories sucks. Nobody wants to live on 1000-1500 calories a day because you will feel exhausted and will probably have trouble getting all the needed nutrients while eating so little food. If, on the other hand, you exercise enough such that (on average) your body takes 2500-3000 calories a day maintain, you can eat a lot more food, have a lot more energy available for the body to do things, and still be at a point where you're losing weight, simply because you are using so much energy.

          • There is a whole psychological component you hinted at too. What if one guy feels happy/energetic etc at 2000 cal and another needs 2500? I think there are both biological reasons why it could be harder to burn, lower metabolism etc, but also other biological factors that just doesn't make you feel full, happy, etc without a certain calorie intake. Both may happen but in the one case at least if the cause is found I suspect you'd be forgive in the other case you'd be asked to suck it up and show some discip

            • My problem is I find exercise boring. I never get the rush after exercise. All I get is tired. Combine that with exercising when it is over 65 degrees out and I fatigue out three times as fast as when it is cooler. And I have a really hard time exercising for half the year. And a difficult time maintaining an exercise habit for the other half. I do try though. And while I don't count calories or watch what I eat. I do try to limit meals and sizes there of. I eat a little several times a day.

              • My problem is I find exercise boring. I never get the rush after exercise.

                Just going out an running or lifting weights generally is quite boring. What I do is get involved with physically demanding activities that I also enjoy. I coach a sports team that allows me to participate. I do certain outdoor activities (hiking, paddling etc) that I enjoy that also happen to be physically taxing. Relatively few people actually enjoy exercise for exercise sake. I just do things I enjoy that also help keep me fit as a second order effect.

        • Except that not all calories entering the body are used or stored by the body and some that do, have different effects in the process as well as people affecting the process directly themselves.

          This can get far too complicated for a post here butsome keys are metabolism, carbohydrates verses fat (think adkins diet), water soluable and fat soluable fiber. If diet and excercise was that simple, there would be one diet plan that works for everyone.

          So to your finacial example, think of part of the intake being

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

          It's also worth noting that not everyone has the same capacity for exercise. For those with a low exercise capacity anything that helps is a huge help.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Yeah. And first we must assume the human body is a frictionless sphere with uniform density in a vacuum.

        How many studies have to come out showing that caloric intake is only one small factor of many in weight management, and by itself means hardly anything? You people are as bad as the climate change deniers and anti-vaxxers.

        I know this is anecdotal, but to stave off any ad hominems: I eat enough calories to feed a small village every day and would be described as "thin" to "average". I know many other peo

        • You do realize that the calories out part of calorie counting depends massively on your metabolism+exercise, right?

      • What does that have to do with the situation? That only applies in a closed system. These microbes (and many other factors) are making this not closed, and causing varying amounts of chemical potential energy to be leaked from the system depending on the genetic make up of the individual.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by TheCarp ( 96830 )

        It isn't that simple though because that only tells you part of cause and effect. If I gave you a capsule that you could swallow that somehow was 100% nutritionally complete and you would require nothing else to live, you would still get hungry and want to eat. Would you be able to "starve" yourself just because you knew you were not "really" starving, you were just perceiving yourself as starving because every signal our ancestors evolved to associate with the need to eat was telling you otherwise?

        Its long

    • If you change your diet you can change these microbs as well.

      • If you change your diet you can change these microbs as well.

        This is based on genes. Your genetic makeup makes your body a more hospitable environment for some microbes.

        My random made-up example: I have a genetic disposition for heartburn and increased acid production. These "Skinny microbes" cannot live in the higher acid environment so I don't get them.

        I do not know that acid is the problem, but it's likely something like that.

    • Re:Oh no (Score:4, Informative)

      by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:39AM (#48349253)

      Reducing intake will reduce weight regardless of state of your gut. Microbes don't generate energy out of nothing.

      This is a story about the fact that microbiome of the gut is being widely recognised as essentially another organ of the body, and differences in microbiome can affect things like how well your gut absorbs energy and so on. However reducing intake will cause weight loss regardless of it. The only question is, "how much of a weight loss per reduced intake".

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Reducing intake will reduce weight regardless of state of your gut. Microbes don't generate energy out of nothing.

        This is a story about the fact that microbiome of the gut is being widely recognised as essentially another organ of the body, and differences in microbiome can affect things like how well your gut absorbs energy and so on. However reducing intake will cause weight loss regardless of it. The only question is, "how much of a weight loss per reduced intake".

        What it shows is another reason why the same diet doesn't work for everyone. Some people can cut back a small amount and lose weight easily, others have to go to such extremes that either their willpower inevitably breaks down or their body panics and goes even further into hording-mode. People who seem to be able to eat as much as they want without gaining much may be "lucky" to have inefficient microbes so they're not absorbing as much of the calories.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          Incorrect. What it shows is that volume of change needs to be different for each person. In general, reduced intake will reduce weight. Increased anaerobic muscular activity will increase energy burn and reduce fat levels. And so on.

          There is no structural difference here. The difference is merely in how much change results in how much results.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Roodvlees ( 2742853 )
        But some people stay thin much longer, their microbes cause the food to be turned into fat much less.
        Also it's not so simple as "just eat less", the body has a concept of what your 'normal' weight is. If you lose some the chemical processes will change to make more fat and compensate for the weight loss. It probably takes about 6 months of holding an amount of weight before this concept changes.

        Eventually being fat is a combination of many factors, several of which you do have control over.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          You appear to confuse concepts of "obesity" with "weight". Weight is a sum of all your body tissues. Obesity is about over abundance of fat tissue. If you reduce intake while retaining mainly "sitting" lifestyle, your body should nominally switch to reduced energy expenditure to maintain fat levels and start burning off muscle mass in addition to fat. While this will reduce fat tissue a significant degree, it will also atrophy your musculature.

          With small exception of people that suffer from severe forms of

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        "The only question is, "how much of a weight loss per reduced intake"."

        That's not only NOT the "only question", it's not even the question that comes to mind. This is nothing more than doubling down on stupidity. ...and not that it's relevant here, but in some animals "gut microbes" do in fact generate energy. The issue here is not simply changing some conversion constant slightly in the equation that proves that fat people are inferior. Gut microbes can have a profound effect on how an individual behave

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          None of which circumvents laws of physics that clearly state that you cannot generate energy from nowhere.

        • in some animals "gut microbes" do in fact generate energy.

          They photosynthesise in the dark, I presume.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

        The only question is, "how much of a weight loss per reduced intake".

        It's not the only question. Clearly if it's twice as hard for one person to reduce their weight and they see half the results it will require more willpower. If we can make it easier to lose weight they are likely to be more successful with their available willpower.

        It's like nicotine patches for smokers. You can just quit without aids but it's much easier if you have them.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          Certainly. That is my entire point: the issue isn't whether a person can affect being overweight through his/her actions, but how much of an impact actions would have. Some people require more effort than others to drop weight, while some require more effort to fatten up.

          This in no way shape of form provides the excuse pushed by many that being overweight is not a result of their own actions. It merely points out that it may be harder for them to stay reasonably fit.

          And when it comes to being obese rather t

    • Doctor: "You have a certain kind of microbes in your gut that causes your body to absorb more of what you eat"
      Patient: "What should I do?"
      Doctor: "Eat less"

      It still boils down to the behavior of the individual.

      Personally I don't see how this is a bad thing. This is a big boon for feeding the world. The problems are individual and cultural.

      You don't want to be fat, eat less and exercise more, that or go see your doctor have him sterilize your digestive track and repopulate it with the "skin

    • *points to the next story* Stupid virus
    • So we can stop starvation by sending fat inducing microbes along with food?

      Oh - and if you're ever stranded on a desert island one should eat all of one's calories at night just before going to bed. This way you can use less calories and be able to last longer until help comes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DogDude ( 805747 )
      Here we go, endless posts about how it's all down to pure willpower and entirely the fault of the individual.

      Hey, if you know of an example where mass was spontaneously created without the addition of energy, it's vitally important that you tell somebody. Physicists everywhere need to know if there's a place in our universe where the law of conservation of mass doesn't apply (in general relativity, of course).
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • It IS about willpower and it IS up to the individual, but I don't think those things are undeserving of sympathy and broader societal support. We make it hard for overweight people to change their diets. Fattening, unhealthy food is cheap. Good food is more expensive. Exercising takes time, we increasingly make sure that people don't have any time outside their jobs. Our jobs are more sedentary than ever before and the bad food is targeted directly at making our brains feel good. Depression goes untreated f

    • Hey fatty, third post and you're already butt hurt? Get some exercise!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hodet ( 620484 )

      This is a tired old debate. The "Stop stuffing your face" vs "Thyroid Problems" discussion. Fact is some people can burn calories quicker than others so there are differences. If you are one of those people that can consume 5000 calories a day then a the more power to you. If you can't you really shouldn't be stuffing your face and drinking a dozen sodas a day. Just logic man. For those who eat a healthy diet, exercise and still have weight issues it can be tough no doubt. Feel good about who you a

  • Diet causes change in those microbes (Score:5, Informative)

    by trout007 ( 975317 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:21AM (#48349175)

    The microbs thrive in different environments. I went from a standard american diet to something more high fat low simple carbs diet with lots of fermented foods. Not only did I lose a bunch of weight but most digestive, allergy, and skin problems went away as well. I think there was something about the microbial environment that a high sugar diet caused that was giving me trouble.

    • The microbs thrive in different environments. I went from a standard american diet to something more high fat low simple carbs diet with lots of fermented foods. Not only did I lose a bunch of weight but most digestive, allergy, and skin problems went away as well. I think there was something about the microbial environment that a high sugar diet caused that was giving me trouble.

      Diet doesn't really change the microbes. Location may have an impact on it, though (which is why there is the old adage of not drinking the local water). Going to a low carb diet works by the body, after about three days of not having enough carbs to convert to energy switches to burning fat reserves. The improved health effects you experience are not because of the microbial change but instead the diet change. Chances are, the same microbes that were there before the diet switch are still there.

      • Re:Diet causes change in those microbes (Score:5, Informative)

        by Derec01 ( 1668942 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:50AM (#48349311)

        Diet doesn't really change the microbes.

        That is not what recent science indicates at all.

        "Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome", Nature 505, 559–563 (23 January 2014) doi:10.1038/nature12820
        http://www.nature.com/nature/j... [nature.com]

        "Here we show that the short-term consumption of diets composed entirely of animal or plant products alters microbial community structure and overwhelms inter-individual differences in microbial gene expression. "

        • Diet doesn't really change the microbes.

          That is not what recent science indicates at all.

          "Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome", Nature 505, 559–563 (23 January 2014) doi:10.1038/nature12820
          http://www.nature.com/nature/j... [nature.com]

          "Here we show that the short-term consumption of diets composed entirely of animal or plant products alters microbial community structure and overwhelms inter-individual differences in microbial gene expression. "

          Yes, but low carb diets, at least described by the OP are not "entirely" animal products (or plant products). It would make sense that microbes that are needed to break down plants, would cease to exist in the gut if there were no plant material to break down. Likewise, for animal protein. We don't really need a new study for this, anybody who has changed a dirty diaper has experienced it. When babies go from breast milk, alone, to other foods, there is a distinct change in the stool. The gut flora needed

      • That is one reason I added the fermented foods. They are full of live microbs.

  • I'm not fat (Score:4, Funny)

    by WormholeFiend ( 674934 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:23AM (#48349183)

    I'm just big genetic'd

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by itzly ( 3699663 )

      total body weight is a function of caloric intake - caloric expenditure

      Ultimately yes, but there are still differences. Suppose you have two people with balanced caloric intake/output, then one person could be feeling fine, while the other is feeling like they're starving. Even worse, some people could actually physically starve, if incoming calories are all stored instead of being used by cells that require them.

  • As opposed to inheritable?

  • How are microbes heritable? (Score:3)

    by Dcnjoe60 ( 682885 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @08:32AM (#48349221)

    If the fetus is in a sterile sack, how do these heritable "gut" microbes get in there? For instance, e.coli isn't in there, but comes from the environment. Wouldn't these microbes follow the same path, in which case they aren't actually heritable, but instead environmental?

    • The baby picks a lot of it up "on the way out". It's one of the effects of a C-section - this drive by infection doesn't occur.

      • The baby picks a lot of it up "on the way out". It's one of the effects of a C-section - this drive by infection doesn't occur.

        But that is my point, if the microbes are from an external source, they are not heritable.

    • In normal birth (vs. C-section), there's a fair amount of mess involved, much of it from Mom. So in that sense she's inadvertently passing on heritable and beneficial microbiota.

      We, in our wisdom, tend to try and tidy things up too much and so may have set our progeny up for later failure.

      The same attitude was prevalent about breastfeeding in the last century (don't do it, just buy our formula and keep those ta-ta's perky).

      • Maybe in the future this will be corrected by adding the right gut bacteria to the bottled products. Then it'll be better than breastfeeding.

        • Certainly, perky tits are worth paying for a substandard imitation of something your body creates for free..

        • Making formula better than breast milk is a very tall order. In the case of gut bacteria, how do we know what the "right" gut bacteria is for any given child? And there are tons of other factors to consider. I'm all for trying to make a better baby formula as there are definitely children that need it to survive, I have a sister in law who doesn't produce healthy milk. But I would be very surprised if we figured out a better than breastmilk formula within this century.

    • Agreed, finding correlating microbes in the guts of twins does not seem to prove genetic causality, if the twins grew up in the same family and same environment. Since we know that the microbes can be passed between mammals via fecal matter ( https://www.sciencenews.org/ar... [sciencenews.org] ) and identical twins are likely exposed to the same traces of fecal matter, I don't see how they have proven genetic causality. The study is behind a paywall unfortunately.

      • The twist is the identical twins. They are showing that the more similar that the genes are, the more likely the have the same or similar gut flora. And the opposite seems to be the case- the more dissimilar genes are, the more likely the gut flora would be dissimilar.

        The use of twins raised by the same parents means they should be exposed to similar enviroments without age separating them. So the takeaway is not really microbes in the gut passed on from mom, but that genes influence the gut flora when two

  • NO!!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jim Sadler ( 3430529 ) on Monday November 10, 2014 @09:01AM (#48349389)
    We are what we eat is a lie. We are that we intake but do not poop.

  • Genes can be turned on and off depending on diet and lifestyle. Not only that, but the types of foods you eat can influence your bacteria:

    The types of bacteria in your gut today may be different tomorrow, depending on what kinds of food you eat, a new study suggests.

    The study also adds evidence to the idea that human diets — acting through the gut bacteria — influence the risk of certain diseases

    http://www.livescience.com/418... [livescience.com]

    We bring a lot of misery on ourselves, but it's human nature to atte

  • ... to harbor microbes.

  • I had an extra helping of sexy beast for dinner last night.

  • Honestly I have a perfect weight loss system that can be proven to work in 100% of the population.

    Infect yourself with a tape worm.

    You will lose a LOT of weight, and eat as much as you want the entire time!

  • So they found certain microbes in the guts of people who are overweight.
    How do they conclude that the microbes cause the people to be overweight? I would assume that it is the other way around. The composition of microbes is determined by the "diet" of the people, if they take up too much fat and carbon certain microbes will grow in their guts.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close