5 ms·

Why is that disconcerting? - Yet another step towards not having to be responsible for your own actions & choices - Given how big of an impact agriculture has

Why is that disconcerting? - Yet another step towards not having to be responsible for your own actions & choices - Given how big of an impact agriculture has on the planet, figuring out how to allow people to eat many times more food simply for the sake of eating it seems... irresponsible to say the least. If anything we should be working in the other direction, so that people require less food.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> Given how big of an impact agriculture has on the planet, figuring out how to allow people to eat many times more food simply for the sake of eating it seems... irresponsible to say the least. If this environmental concern justifies compelling people who are born with unusually efficient microbiomes to not have that condition treated and corrected, despite the health benefits, does it also compel people born with normally or under efficient gut microbiomes to have that "condition" treated and corrected so that they have more environmentally-sound, hyper-efficient gut microbiomes, notwithstanding the health and weight-management challenges that will pose for them. Are their other health conditions that people ought to leave untreated to reduce environmental footprint? I mean, certainly if we just didn't treat life-threatening conditions and let people die, we'd save both their downstream food consumption and the resources (some of which are themselves, or have as inputs, agricultural products) used in the treatments, which, if "the impact agriculture has on the planet" is sufficient to deny treatments that might increase it, ought to be a compelling concern. (Of course, on the other hand, since part of the point of treating extra-efficient gut microbiomes is to help people lose weight, which will [by reducing maintenance needs] mitigate the agriculture impact they have from its initial peak, and reduce the energy cost of transporting them, etc. -- often born through fossil fuels, which also have a tremendous impact on the plant -- I'm not convinced that even on its own terms your criticism is all that well thought out beyond the very short-term impacts.)
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- daenz 11y ago
  > people who are born with unusually efficient microbiomes Have you looked at obesity statistics? http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/Pages/overweight-obesity-statistics.aspx http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistic... > More than 1 in 3 adults are considered to be obese. > More than 1 in 6 children and adolescents ages 6 to 19 are considered to be obese. Do you mean to say that 33% of quantifiably obese adults have unusually efficient gut bacteria? These aren't strange outliers, it's one third of the adult population.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Do you mean to say that 33% of quantifiably obese adults have unusually efficient gut bacteria? Its not implausible that a substantial share of them do; there's a lot of interesting hints in recent research suggesting that elements of modern lifestyles in the US may have substantially affected gut microbiomes over the last several generations, starting with very early life changes that affect the way they get initially established. An important part of the obesity epidemic -- though almost certainly not its sole cause; diet and activity pattern changes with effects other than via the composition of the microbiome certainly exist -- may well be widespread disruption of normal gut microbiome.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    One thing that changes gut flora is the amount of fibre a person eats. If a nation eats less fibre it makes sense that a large portion of that nation will experience changes in gut flora.
    - DrScump 11y ago
      Not just amount of fiber, but makeup of the fiber (soluble vs insoluble, compatibility with gut bacteria, etc.)
  - DrScump 11y ago
    You are putting words in his mouth here, as I read it, as you rely on your belief that obesity can only be the result of overeating. - The microbiome is a factor, which is only in the past few years being explored. - thyroid hormone levels are a big factor - genetics are a factor (note that identical twins raised in different environments tend to end up more alike each other in BMI than like their siblings in the same environment) - genetic low-response to cardio (check out the recent University of Bath study) - viruses are a factor (AD-36 being one known one) - percentage of BAT ("brown fat") is a factor - systemic inflammation is a factor etc. etc.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> Given how big of an impact agriculture has on the planet, figuring out how to allow people to eat many times more food simply for the sake of eating it seems... irresponsible to say the least. If this environmental concern justifies compelling people who are born with unusually efficient microbiomes to not have that condition treated and corrected, despite the health benefits, does it also compel people born with normally or under efficient gut microbiomes to have that "condition" treated and corrected so that they have more environmentally-sound, hyper-efficient gut microbiomes, notwithstanding the health and weight-management challenges that will pose for them. Are their other health conditions that people ought to leave untreated to reduce environmental footprint? I mean, certainly if we just didn't treat life-threatening conditions and let people die, we'd save both their downstream food consumption and the resources (some of which are themselves, or have as inputs, agricultural products) used in the treatments, which, if "the impact agriculture has on the planet" is sufficient to deny treatments that might increase it, ought to be a compelling concern. (Of course, on the other hand, since part of the point of treating extra-efficient gut microbiomes is to help people lose weight, which will [by reducing maintenance needs] mitigate the agriculture impact they have from its initial peak, and reduce the energy cost of transporting them, etc. -- often born through fossil fuels, which also have a tremendous impact on the plant -- I'm not convinced that even on its own terms your criticism is all that well thought out beyond the very short-term impacts.)

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
daenz 11y ago
> people who are born with unusually efficient microbiomes Have you looked at obesity statistics? http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/Pages/overweight-obesity-statistics.aspx http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistic... > More than 1 in 3 adults are considered to be obese. > More than 1 in 6 children and adolescents ages 6 to 19 are considered to be obese. Do you mean to say that 33% of quantifiably obese adults have unusually efficient gut bacteria? These aren't strange outliers, it's one third of the adult population.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Do you mean to say that 33% of quantifiably obese adults have unusually efficient gut bacteria? Its not implausible that a substantial share of them do; there's a lot of interesting hints in recent research suggesting that elements of modern lifestyles in the US may have substantially affected gut microbiomes over the last several generations, starting with very early life changes that affect the way they get initially established. An important part of the obesity epidemic -- though almost certainly not its sole cause; diet and activity pattern changes with effects other than via the composition of the microbiome certainly exist -- may well be widespread disruption of normal gut microbiome.
- DanBC 11y ago
  One thing that changes gut flora is the amount of fibre a person eats. If a nation eats less fibre it makes sense that a large portion of that nation will experience changes in gut flora.
  - DrScump 11y ago
    Not just amount of fiber, but makeup of the fiber (soluble vs insoluble, compatibility with gut bacteria, etc.)
- DrScump 11y ago
  You are putting words in his mouth here, as I read it, as you rely on your belief that obesity can only be the result of overeating. - The microbiome is a factor, which is only in the past few years being explored. - thyroid hormone levels are a big factor - genetics are a factor (note that identical twins raised in different environments tend to end up more alike each other in BMI than like their siblings in the same environment) - genetic low-response to cardio (check out the recent University of Bath study) - viruses are a factor (AD-36 being one known one) - percentage of BAT ("brown fat") is a factor - systemic inflammation is a factor etc. etc.