5 ms·

I had never heard of slime mold time mold dot com until today, so I read back through the author's theories and I'm not convinced there's anything here. His in

I had never heard of slime mold time mold dot com until today, so I read back through the author's theories and I'm not convinced there's anything here. His initial premise, that the cause of obesity is a mystery, doesn't seem to be that well-researched. Most importantly, he does not really poke holes in the basic premise that the cause is linked to increased availability of food in general coupled with more people living sedentary lifestyles. He even mentions that average daily caloric intake has gone up c. 400 kcal since the turn of the 20th century. Which, for someone with a maintenance-level diet, would cause a 35-45 lb. annual weight gain. The antibiotic theory here doesn't seem to address the possibility of wealth and industrialization as a confounding variable. In fact, he doesn't seem to seriously address confounding variables anywhere in his analysis. I don't assert that antibiotics in the food supply should not be considered harmful, but his vague hand-waving in the direction of a culprit for some great unknown mystery seems thin at best. I'd love to hear some competing takes.

irthomasthomas 5y ago
I agree with you on the first point, however, the sedentary lifestyle hypothesis is also out. It's part of the same f Fat Lazy Slob theory that always blames the people for their lifestyle choices. What do they tell you to do build up an appetite? Exercise. Exercise makes you hungry, and if you try to cure that hunger with low nutrient carbs then you will end up obese and malnourished.
simiones 5y ago
> He even mentions that average daily caloric intake has gone up c. 400 kcal since the turn of the 20th century. Which, for someone with a maintenance-level diet, would cause a 35-45 lb. annual weight gain. That's one data point, but they also show that caloric intake has been decreasing since 2010 and yet obesity is still increasing. They also mention that the 400 Cal figure is based on consumption in the 1960s-70s vs today, but that there are reasons to believe that at the turn of the century consumption would have been higher than that. Also, observing that people are eating more just begs the question: why are they eating more today than they need, when they weren't dong this in the past? > Most importantly, he does not really poke holes in the basic premise that the cause is linked to increased availability of food in general coupled with more people living sedentary lifestyles. Except that people are exercising on average more today than in 2010 or 1990, and more than office workers in 1950, and still obesity is going up. Similarly for availability of food. Also, none of your observations address the bizarre correlation between obesity and altitude for example. > The antibiotic theory here doesn't seem to address the possibility of wealth and industrialization as a confounding variable. In fact, he doesn't seem to seriously address confounding variables anywhere in his analysis. Industrialization and wealth are not direct causes of obesity - people don't eat money or factories. If people in countries A and B are eating the same amount and composition on average, but country A is wealthy and industrial and country B is poor and rural, and country A has higher average BMI than country B, then you should exactly start looking at some environmental causes for the difference. Edit to add: > Which, for someone with a maintenance-level diet, would cause a 35-45 lb. annual weight gain. This is nonsense - there is no way to predict weight gain based on calorie intake - variance between people is too huge on this metric - individual BMR alone varies between 1000 kcal/day up to 2500 kcal/day.
- i_am_proteus 5y ago
  Industrialization dramatically increases agricultural output, primarily due to use of fossil-fired tractors, harvesters, and irrigation pumps, along with fertilizers (which are either produced via industrial process such as Haber-Bosch, or are mined with the aid of industrial machines). Industrialization also enables sedentary lifestyles since humans are now examining computer screens and sheets of paper, and riding in steel vehicles on paved roads and rails, rather than labouring. I have examined the author's claims concerning altitude. He presents a coloured map of the United States and makes the claim `Obesity is less common at high altitudes because of the watershed.` Yet his coloured map shows California (Most of the population lives near sea level. Even inland Sacramento sits at 46 feet.) as substantially less obese than the Appalachian states. His hypothesis is interesting but the evidence appears lacking.
  - simiones 5y ago
    People with sedentary lifestyles were common in the 1900s as well, well above the 1% of the population that suffered from obesity. People with sedentary lifestyles have also tended to have more access to food, again with no corresponding explosion in obesity. Also, agricultural output is not directly related to human consumption, past some base. So again, there may be second order effects on known causes of obesity (food and exercise) but if those are already controlled for, we are only left with unknown factors. Regarding altitude, they do mention in a future article that California seems to be an exception, but that may be explained by California's drinking water being in a separate watershed than surrounding states. I don't know enough geography to know if this is accurate or not. Edit: here is the quote from III: > It’s important to note that altitude itself doesn’t affect obesity directly. Instead, altitude is a proxy for how high an area is in the watershed, which is itself a proxy for how badly the local water supply is contaminated. This is why Mississippi is more obese than low-lying areas of California. In California the water supply hasn’t traveled nearly as far in its path to the ocean, and has traveled past fewer farms, highways, cities, and factories.
    - i_am_proteus 5y ago
      >Also, agricultural output is not directly related to human consumption, past some base. Precisely. Prior to the widespread industrialization of United States farms, there were occasional famines in the United States. 1/3 to 1/2 of the country lived on farms and were engaged in farming. The industrial revolution freed us from the burden of physical labor, and provided plentiful food. If California an exception, are Washington and Oregon also exceptions? Why does obesity not increase as one travels down the Mississippi? One would expect Louisiana (Mississippi delta) to be substantially worse than Kentucky (more mountainous and well-upstream of Louisiana) and Michigan (situated on the Great Lakes). Michigan and Louisiana are similar, and Kentucky is much worse. I refer to the author's data source.[0] [0]https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html#states https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html#states
giantg2 5y ago
I know plenty of fat vegetarians/vegans. It seems they would not be exposed to those antibiotics. I remember seeing a Ted Talk years ago where the speaker said that obese people have an issue with androgenesis. His theory was that it was causally linked, but I believe that was unconfirmed.
- teachrdan 5y ago
  Might vegetarians still be exposed through eggs and dairy products?
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Possibly, but not if they are also eating those items selectively, like organic etc. Some of the vegetarians I know are pretty selective about the treatment of the animals that those items come from. I believe they said organic standards require eggs to be produced by chickens that have some outdoor exposure instead of sitting in cages their whole lives.
bsk26 5y ago
Looking back at the the first article in the series, they use hunter gatherer groups as examples of people who aren’t obese without acknowledging this is almost certainly due to extreme calorie restriction. Overeating might not explain everything but starving will definitely make you skinny
lmilcin 5y ago
General availability of food as a driver of obesity is a false premise IMO. It does not explain a lot of countries where food had been available for well over half a century in any quantity you wanted and yet people don't have problem with obesity. Saying these countries are somehow "special" because of their cuisine or tradition seems like admitting that something else rather than availability of food is an important influence. Also one other interesting point is that not all countries see increasing obesity. For example, Canada has not seen significant increase in overweight and obesity since at least early 90s while US seen its rates double during that time. I don't think anybody will say that food is scarce in Canada.
- armchairhacker 5y ago
  Also even though starvation was much more common back then, people still had access to excess food and didn’t get fat. Some animals will eat until they literally explode. People have a fullness indicator but we ignore it, or it gets shifted towards eating too much. I’m on the side that we’re overthinking it and a big contributor to obesity is just really bad cultural habits. A lot of people barely exercise at all, even walking, and when they get hungry they grab an unhealthy snack in 5 seconds. Even though are ancestors didn’t understand or care about exercise or getting fat, I doubt they had those habits. Unfortunately once someone develops those habits, even as a kid, they’re hard to unlearn and they could affect the body’s set point. And they’re so ingrained into our culture that even people who try to be healthy (e.g. by eating a “healthy” fruit bar or exercising 30min on top of their sedentary lifestyle) don’t avoid them. Now, there are people who got obese even though they exercise and eat whole foods, but I would be surprised if they aren’t a minority.

irthomasthomas 5y ago

I agree with you on the first point, however, the sedentary lifestyle hypothesis is also out. It's part of the same f Fat Lazy Slob theory that always blames the people for their lifestyle choices. What do they tell you to do build up an appetite? Exercise. Exercise makes you hungry, and if you try to cure that hunger with low nutrient carbs then you will end up obese and malnourished.

simiones 5y ago

> He even mentions that average daily caloric intake has gone up c. 400 kcal since the turn of the 20th century. Which, for someone with a maintenance-level diet, would cause a 35-45 lb. annual weight gain. That's one data point, but they also show that caloric intake has been decreasing since 2010 and yet obesity is still increasing. They also mention that the 400 Cal figure is based on consumption in the 1960s-70s vs today, but that there are reasons to believe that at the turn of the century consumption would have been higher than that. Also, observing that people are eating more just begs the question: why are they eating more today than they need, when they weren't dong this in the past? > Most importantly, he does not really poke holes in the basic premise that the cause is linked to increased availability of food in general coupled with more people living sedentary lifestyles. Except that people are exercising on average more today than in 2010 or 1990, and more than office workers in 1950, and still obesity is going up. Similarly for availability of food. Also, none of your observations address the bizarre correlation between obesity and altitude for example. > The antibiotic theory here doesn't seem to address the possibility of wealth and industrialization as a confounding variable. In fact, he doesn't seem to seriously address confounding variables anywhere in his analysis. Industrialization and wealth are not direct causes of obesity - people don't eat money or factories. If people in countries A and B are eating the same amount and composition on average, but country A is wealthy and industrial and country B is poor and rural, and country A has higher average BMI than country B, then you should exactly start looking at some environmental causes for the difference. Edit to add: > Which, for someone with a maintenance-level diet, would cause a 35-45 lb. annual weight gain. This is nonsense - there is no way to predict weight gain based on calorie intake - variance between people is too huge on this metric - individual BMR alone varies between 1000 kcal/day up to 2500 kcal/day.

i_am_proteus 5y ago
Industrialization dramatically increases agricultural output, primarily due to use of fossil-fired tractors, harvesters, and irrigation pumps, along with fertilizers (which are either produced via industrial process such as Haber-Bosch, or are mined with the aid of industrial machines). Industrialization also enables sedentary lifestyles since humans are now examining computer screens and sheets of paper, and riding in steel vehicles on paved roads and rails, rather than labouring. I have examined the author's claims concerning altitude. He presents a coloured map of the United States and makes the claim `Obesity is less common at high altitudes because of the watershed.` Yet his coloured map shows California (Most of the population lives near sea level. Even inland Sacramento sits at 46 feet.) as substantially less obese than the Appalachian states. His hypothesis is interesting but the evidence appears lacking.
- simiones 5y ago
  People with sedentary lifestyles were common in the 1900s as well, well above the 1% of the population that suffered from obesity. People with sedentary lifestyles have also tended to have more access to food, again with no corresponding explosion in obesity. Also, agricultural output is not directly related to human consumption, past some base. So again, there may be second order effects on known causes of obesity (food and exercise) but if those are already controlled for, we are only left with unknown factors. Regarding altitude, they do mention in a future article that California seems to be an exception, but that may be explained by California's drinking water being in a separate watershed than surrounding states. I don't know enough geography to know if this is accurate or not. Edit: here is the quote from III: > It’s important to note that altitude itself doesn’t affect obesity directly. Instead, altitude is a proxy for how high an area is in the watershed, which is itself a proxy for how badly the local water supply is contaminated. This is why Mississippi is more obese than low-lying areas of California. In California the water supply hasn’t traveled nearly as far in its path to the ocean, and has traveled past fewer farms, highways, cities, and factories.
  - i_am_proteus 5y ago
    >Also, agricultural output is not directly related to human consumption, past some base. Precisely. Prior to the widespread industrialization of United States farms, there were occasional famines in the United States. 1/3 to 1/2 of the country lived on farms and were engaged in farming. The industrial revolution freed us from the burden of physical labor, and provided plentiful food. If California an exception, are Washington and Oregon also exceptions? Why does obesity not increase as one travels down the Mississippi? One would expect Louisiana (Mississippi delta) to be substantially worse than Kentucky (more mountainous and well-upstream of Louisiana) and Michigan (situated on the Great Lakes). Michigan and Louisiana are similar, and Kentucky is much worse. I refer to the author's data source.[0] [0]https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html#states https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html#states

giantg2 5y ago

I know plenty of fat vegetarians/vegans. It seems they would not be exposed to those antibiotics. I remember seeing a Ted Talk years ago where the speaker said that obese people have an issue with androgenesis. His theory was that it was causally linked, but I believe that was unconfirmed.

teachrdan 5y ago
Might vegetarians still be exposed through eggs and dairy products?
- giantg2 5y ago
  Possibly, but not if they are also eating those items selectively, like organic etc. Some of the vegetarians I know are pretty selective about the treatment of the animals that those items come from. I believe they said organic standards require eggs to be produced by chickens that have some outdoor exposure instead of sitting in cages their whole lives.

bsk26 5y ago

Looking back at the the first article in the series, they use hunter gatherer groups as examples of people who aren’t obese without acknowledging this is almost certainly due to extreme calorie restriction. Overeating might not explain everything but starving will definitely make you skinny

lmilcin 5y ago

General availability of food as a driver of obesity is a false premise IMO. It does not explain a lot of countries where food had been available for well over half a century in any quantity you wanted and yet people don't have problem with obesity. Saying these countries are somehow "special" because of their cuisine or tradition seems like admitting that something else rather than availability of food is an important influence. Also one other interesting point is that not all countries see increasing obesity. For example, Canada has not seen significant increase in overweight and obesity since at least early 90s while US seen its rates double during that time. I don't think anybody will say that food is scarce in Canada.

armchairhacker 5y ago
Also even though starvation was much more common back then, people still had access to excess food and didn’t get fat. Some animals will eat until they literally explode. People have a fullness indicator but we ignore it, or it gets shifted towards eating too much. I’m on the side that we’re overthinking it and a big contributor to obesity is just really bad cultural habits. A lot of people barely exercise at all, even walking, and when they get hungry they grab an unhealthy snack in 5 seconds. Even though are ancestors didn’t understand or care about exercise or getting fat, I doubt they had those habits. Unfortunately once someone develops those habits, even as a kid, they’re hard to unlearn and they could affect the body’s set point. And they’re so ingrained into our culture that even people who try to be healthy (e.g. by eating a “healthy” fruit bar or exercising 30min on top of their sedentary lifestyle) don’t avoid them. Now, there are people who got obese even though they exercise and eat whole foods, but I would be surprised if they aren’t a minority.