Genetically a higher appetite
Discussion
The biological mechanisms that underpin hunger and satiety must have a genetic code.
It follows that there must be variations in the expression of that code. It's thought that the predisposition for depositing fat may have been an evolutionary advantage in times of feast or famine. Not so helpful in our food environment.
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
It follows that there must be variations in the expression of that code. It's thought that the predisposition for depositing fat may have been an evolutionary advantage in times of feast or famine. Not so helpful in our food environment.
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
Only anecdotally but in my family and friendship group there are some people with tiny appetites and some huge.
Doesn’t necessarily mean the ones with massive appetites are overweight but they probably work harder to not put on weight and the ones with larger appetites who don’t work at it are therefore larger.
The ones with tiny appetites are generally slim and just aren’t as interested in eating a lot.
What does go against what the to program appears to say is how appetite can vary across a month or year and depend a lot on other outside influences
Doesn’t necessarily mean the ones with massive appetites are overweight but they probably work harder to not put on weight and the ones with larger appetites who don’t work at it are therefore larger.
The ones with tiny appetites are generally slim and just aren’t as interested in eating a lot.
What does go against what the to program appears to say is how appetite can vary across a month or year and depend a lot on other outside influences
oddman said:
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
But almost unlimited, cheap and heavily processed junk foods (delivered straight to your sofa) were also unknown a generation ago. Combine this with children who have never eaten a home cooked meal, and it's not hard to understand.Perhaps those genetically predisposed now have a mechanism to fulfil that need.
The thought behind why someone continues to put food in their mouths needs looking at. Food can be an addiction much like vapes, smoking, drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, computer games, clubbing, weight lifting, running, cycling, tennis...
To lose weight, simply stop putting stuff in your mouth.
To lose weight, simply stop putting stuff in your mouth.
LimaDelta said:
oddman said:
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
But almost unlimited, cheap and heavily processed junk foods (delivered straight to your sofa) were also unknown a generation ago. Combine this with children who have never eaten a home cooked meal, and it's not hard to understand.Hoofy said:
The thought behind why someone continues to put food in their mouths needs looking at. Food can be an addiction much like vapes, smoking, drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, computer games, clubbing, weight lifting, running, cycling, tennis...
To lose weight, simply stop putting stuff in your mouth.
Exactly this. There are plenty of genetic predispositions to many physical and character traits. To lose weight, simply stop putting stuff in your mouth.
But for 99% of the population these can be adjusted, overcome, or altered through their own will. Or with minimal mental training and control.
Education is probably the biggest divider of lifestyle choices, rather than DNA.
durbster said:
Seems like something that would be quite easy to test.
Do fostered or adopted kids have the same eating habits as their biological parents, or those of the people they grow up with?
Been done monozygotic (genetically identical) twins have a higher correlation of obesity than dizygotic twins who only share half their DNA. However the correlation is not 100% so environment has a part to play and the inheritance is polygenic ie. apart from rare syndromes like Prader Willi syndrome, the inheritance is carried in multiple gene sets.Do fostered or adopted kids have the same eating habits as their biological parents, or those of the people they grow up with?
Intelligence is mostly genetic, will power is very closely linked to intelligence, so…
A huge part of obesity is also insecurity, people believing they or their lives are not worth the healthy effort for themselves as they are not worth it and/or they have no interest in having a longer life.
So you could say ‘some’ obesity is genetically linked.
A huge part of obesity is also insecurity, people believing they or their lives are not worth the healthy effort for themselves as they are not worth it and/or they have no interest in having a longer life.
So you could say ‘some’ obesity is genetically linked.
Kerniki said:
Intelligence is mostly genetic, will power is very closely linked to intelligence, so…
A huge part of obesity is also insecurity, people believing they or their lives are not worth the healthy effort for themselves as they are not worth it and/or they have no interest in having a longer life.
So you could say ‘some’ obesity is genetically linked.
I think you're using 'will power' as a substitute for 'the capacity to delay gratification'. The Stanford Marshmallow Experiments demonstrate that the ability to delay gratification in children is more complex than a straightforward correlation with intelligence. Furthermore there are demonstrable brain imaging differences between delayers and non delayers decades later (greater pre frontal activity in delayers). So there is definitely difference in the wiring of those with 'will power' and those without.A huge part of obesity is also insecurity, people believing they or their lives are not worth the healthy effort for themselves as they are not worth it and/or they have no interest in having a longer life.
So you could say ‘some’ obesity is genetically linked.
In common sense terms we would regard someone who can foresee the consequences of actions and make better long term choices as 'intelligent' so I can see the link. It's just ridiculously complex.
mickythefish said:
Eat more do less is that genetic predisposition?
It's a useful strategy for an organism which belongs to population that experiences periods of famine and periods of plenty. It is not unreasonable to suppose that over generations, the individuals with genes which predispose to overeating and storing fat during times of plenty and economising on energy expenditure at all times are more likely to survive and reproduce than those who don't.There's a belief that the high rates of abdominal obesity and type II diabetes in South Asian/India Pakistan compared with more temperate regions are due to the cyclical availablity or lack of food caused by unreliable growing conditions/monsoon climate. Some radicals even go as far to suggest that Winston Churchill is responsible for the epidemic of diabetes is Sout Asians because of the Bengal famine in WWII. I don't think evolution works like that.
It's pretty well established that outside of marathon runners, high mileage cyclists and triathletes doing many hours of aerobic activity a week the body is more than able to compensate by dialling down energy consumption and/or overeating post exercise so even if you do more your body makes you do less.
I think an understanding that some of us might have a predisposition to overeat is useful information in an environment where there is never famine and always an abundance of hyperpalatable, calorie dense and relatively unsatisfying things to eat (I don't regard UPFs as food, rather edible industrial products).
Edited by oddman on Friday 14th June 13:44
Edited by oddman on Friday 14th June 13:44
Try looking at the MC4 (or MC4R gene). I worked with a chap who had this. A Dr in Bromsgrove was an expert on this and diagnosed him. It didn’t matter how much he ate he never felt full or as though he had had enough to eat. He always felt hungry. I did have information on this by said Dr but have lost the link since computer upgraded. Whilst the majority is self inflicted for some there is a genetic component.
Also the amount of “brown fat” you have in your back can make a difference. Brown fat cells have more mitochondria the power house of cells that help to burn calories. Less brown fat less ability to burn off calories.
Also interesting is the Prada Willi syndrome (think Katie Price son). They have an insatiable appetite but are usually malnourished.
So not always a case of eat less move more.
Unfortunately I have neither of those excuses to rely on,!
Also the amount of “brown fat” you have in your back can make a difference. Brown fat cells have more mitochondria the power house of cells that help to burn calories. Less brown fat less ability to burn off calories.
Also interesting is the Prada Willi syndrome (think Katie Price son). They have an insatiable appetite but are usually malnourished.
So not always a case of eat less move more.
Unfortunately I have neither of those excuses to rely on,!
If it was a genetic issue how could the obesity crisis arrive in one generation?
Overeating is mostly an education issue.
Your body needs nutrients and it makes you hungry so you will eat them. If you eat high nutrition food you can then not eat for hours, or even 'til the next day. Eat a packet of crisps and you will be hungry again in an hour.
What you choose to eat controls how much you will eat. Making good choices is largely down to education.
Half the crap people eat shouldn't even be considered food. But it is there in the supermarkets and they see other fat people eating it so they just assume.
Overeating is mostly an education issue.
Your body needs nutrients and it makes you hungry so you will eat them. If you eat high nutrition food you can then not eat for hours, or even 'til the next day. Eat a packet of crisps and you will be hungry again in an hour.
What you choose to eat controls how much you will eat. Making good choices is largely down to education.
Half the crap people eat shouldn't even be considered food. But it is there in the supermarkets and they see other fat people eating it so they just assume.
oddman said:
The biological mechanisms that underpin hunger and satiety must have a genetic code.
It follows that there must be variations in the expression of that code. It's thought that the predisposition for depositing fat may have been an evolutionary advantage in times of feast or famine. Not so helpful in our food environment.
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
Agreed.It follows that there must be variations in the expression of that code. It's thought that the predisposition for depositing fat may have been an evolutionary advantage in times of feast or famine. Not so helpful in our food environment.
Genetics doesn't explain why obesity rates have doubled since 1990 and type II diabetes is now occurring in children (unknown a generation ago)
I seem to have very little hunger drive! I eat out of habit and because I enjoy it, but rarely because of hunger.
I never eat more than two meals a day. I always have an evening meal but breakfast/lunch is one or the other. If I'm busy then I can easily skip breakfast/lunch and only eat an evening meal so will be 24 hours without food. At that point I'm only just starting to feel hungry.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff