4 ms·

> Every single hospital-ward double blind clinical trial over the last 100 years says exactly the same thing: net energy balance is what determines how fat you

> Every single hospital-ward double blind clinical trial over the last 100 years says exactly the same thing: net energy balance is what determines how fat you are, no matter the macronutrient content of the diet. Here's my problem with this: the energy balance theory is the status quo, yet for as many studies as you can dig up to support it, you'll also find conflicting observations (some of which also go back over 100 years). I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm simply saying that the hormone theory of obesity shouldn't be disregarded solely because it doesn't fit the status quo. It needs to be tested. Another problem I have is that the energy balance theory is just too convenient. It's a greay way to dismiss obesity as a simple failure of willpower, and to dismiss the obese as being morally inferior to the rest of us. In other words, our judgmental attitude toward obesity could be blinding us to its real cause. Let's test the hormone theory, and if it turns out wrong, we've only learned more about obesity. If it turns out correct, we could possibly save many lives and prevent a lot of suffering. That said, I find it absurd to believe that only energy balance matters. In effect, this predicts that despite the dozens of hormones involved in human metabolism, it all boils down to caloric content. That doesn't make any sense to me. Taubes actually wrote an interesting thought experiment on this: http://garytaubes.com/2012/11/what-would-happen-if-thoughts-and-thought-experiments-on-the-calorie-issue/ http://garytaubes.com/2012/11/what-would-happen-if-thoughts-...

jp555 13y ago
Energy balance is the physics of biochemistry; there is no arguing away the laws of thermodynamics. If you get heavier, it's because you consumed more energy than you used over a period of time. There is no other way to gain or lose weight* (no matter the proportion of muscle/fat that's gained or lost). I think you are confusing weight & body composition with "health". They are interconnected but not the same thing. I believe (and it is just a belief) that a lifetime of staying lean (& strong) is the single best way to maximizes the health benefits of a diet, whatever that diet may be. You can't eat "unhealthy" amounts of any macronutrient if you're eating to stay lean (<15% body fat for men). Don't pull out the "a simple failure of willpower" straw man; I never claimed that. Hormones play a HUGE role in metabolism. My bedtime reading is how the chemical reactions they drive fit into human metabolism. you're comment seems to make them out to be "magical", which I suspect is due to your ignorance of them. I highly recommend reading up on them, just not via the media (Taubes only gives you his choice of the science), but via biochemistry text books like "Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism" http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Nutrition-Metabolism-Sareen-Gropper/dp/0495116572 http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Nutrition-Metabolism-Sareen-G... * there are extreme exceptions; liposuction is one way. :P
- bollockitis 13y ago
  > Energy balance is the physics of biochemistry; there is no arguing away the laws of thermodynamics. If you get heavier, it's because you consumed more energy than you used over a period of time. There is no other way to gain or lose weight* (no matter the proportion of muscle/fat that's gained or lost). I'm not claiming that the body can somehow defy the laws of thermodynamics. Obviously to become "heavier" one must consume more energy than one expends, but to lose fat -- specifically fat, not muscle tissue or bone or water -- the question is this: how important is the role of hormones in fat regulation? Does an increased insulin load, coupled with insulin resistance caused by long-term exposure to chronically high insulin levels, promote greater fat storage? And does this greater mass of fat, which itself is a hormonally active organ, affect the body in a way that results in illness and further weight gain? Would an endocrinologist tell a diabetic that macronutrient content doesn't matter? Should we give that same advice to people with metabolic syndrome or those who are at risk of developing it? If insulin resistance is the primary cause of Type 2 Diabetes, and insulin is the primary hormone involved in fat storage -- both non-controversial statements -- then wouldn't it make sense for those at risk of developing T2DM to eat foods that produced a minimal insulin response? Read Taubes's thought experiment I linked above. If you're willing to make nutrition texts bedtime reading, then you will at least find it interesting, even if you disagree with it. Though Taubes is not a scientist and he doesn't claim to be, he does make a compelling argument. > Don't pull out the "a simple failure of willpower" straw man; I never claimed that. It wasn't intended to target you specifically, but this attitude is pervasive, even among medical professionals. There are people out there who would much rather believe that every obese patient is just a lazy glutton who can't control himself. I know a few of these people myself, one of whom is a prominent oncologist. Science requires that we put aside our biases and assumptions. > Hormones play a HUGE role in metabolism. My bedtime reading is how the chemical reactions they drive fit into human metabolism. you're comment seems to make them out to be "magical", which I suspect is due to your ignorance of them. I'm not claiming hormones are magical. I am merely suggesting that their known role in fat regulation might also play a critical role in obesity. It's been a while since I studied the topic in any great depth, so I can't compete with your bedtime reading, and I don't want to link spam, so I'm keeping it simple. Anyway, I believe the science will eventually shed some light on this issue. There are clinical trials in the planning stages right now, so hopefully we won't have long to wait.

jp555 13y ago

Energy balance is the physics of biochemistry; there is no arguing away the laws of thermodynamics. If you get heavier, it's because you consumed more energy than you used over a period of time. There is no other way to gain or lose weight* (no matter the proportion of muscle/fat that's gained or lost). I think you are confusing weight & body composition with "health". They are interconnected but not the same thing. I believe (and it is just a belief) that a lifetime of staying lean (& strong) is the single best way to maximizes the health benefits of a diet, whatever that diet may be. You can't eat "unhealthy" amounts of any macronutrient if you're eating to stay lean (<15% body fat for men). Don't pull out the "a simple failure of willpower" straw man; I never claimed that. Hormones play a HUGE role in metabolism. My bedtime reading is how the chemical reactions they drive fit into human metabolism. you're comment seems to make them out to be "magical", which I suspect is due to your ignorance of them. I highly recommend reading up on them, just not via the media (Taubes only gives you his choice of the science), but via biochemistry text books like "Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism" http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Nutrition-Metabolism-Sareen-Gropper/dp/0495116572 http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Nutrition-Metabolism-Sareen-G... * there are extreme exceptions; liposuction is one way. :P

bollockitis 13y ago
> Energy balance is the physics of biochemistry; there is no arguing away the laws of thermodynamics. If you get heavier, it's because you consumed more energy than you used over a period of time. There is no other way to gain or lose weight* (no matter the proportion of muscle/fat that's gained or lost). I'm not claiming that the body can somehow defy the laws of thermodynamics. Obviously to become "heavier" one must consume more energy than one expends, but to lose fat -- specifically fat, not muscle tissue or bone or water -- the question is this: how important is the role of hormones in fat regulation? Does an increased insulin load, coupled with insulin resistance caused by long-term exposure to chronically high insulin levels, promote greater fat storage? And does this greater mass of fat, which itself is a hormonally active organ, affect the body in a way that results in illness and further weight gain? Would an endocrinologist tell a diabetic that macronutrient content doesn't matter? Should we give that same advice to people with metabolic syndrome or those who are at risk of developing it? If insulin resistance is the primary cause of Type 2 Diabetes, and insulin is the primary hormone involved in fat storage -- both non-controversial statements -- then wouldn't it make sense for those at risk of developing T2DM to eat foods that produced a minimal insulin response? Read Taubes's thought experiment I linked above. If you're willing to make nutrition texts bedtime reading, then you will at least find it interesting, even if you disagree with it. Though Taubes is not a scientist and he doesn't claim to be, he does make a compelling argument. > Don't pull out the "a simple failure of willpower" straw man; I never claimed that. It wasn't intended to target you specifically, but this attitude is pervasive, even among medical professionals. There are people out there who would much rather believe that every obese patient is just a lazy glutton who can't control himself. I know a few of these people myself, one of whom is a prominent oncologist. Science requires that we put aside our biases and assumptions. > Hormones play a HUGE role in metabolism. My bedtime reading is how the chemical reactions they drive fit into human metabolism. you're comment seems to make them out to be "magical", which I suspect is due to your ignorance of them. I'm not claiming hormones are magical. I am merely suggesting that their known role in fat regulation might also play a critical role in obesity. It's been a while since I studied the topic in any great depth, so I can't compete with your bedtime reading, and I don't want to link spam, so I'm keeping it simple. Anyway, I believe the science will eventually shed some light on this issue. There are clinical trials in the planning stages right now, so hopefully we won't have long to wait.