Obese Patients' Reaction to Diet Can Be Predicted, Study Finds

[HuckleB]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091124093539.htm

"The presence of increased body fat, and therefore higher levels of inflammatory substances in the blood, hinders the loss and maintenance of body weight; as shown by a research project of the University of Navarra conducted by Estíbaliz Goyenechea Soto, a scientist at the School of Pharmacy.

The project, entitled "A nutrigenetic and nutrigenomic study in relation to the control of body weight and inflammation," examines how the individual genetics of obese patients can help or hinder weight loss when dieting and even influence the subsequent long term maintenance of their weight loss.

Some overweight or obese people have mutated or altered genes that initially make it difficult to lose weight and later make it easier to regain lost body weight in a period of six months or a year. This problem occurs similarly in patients who have higher levels of inflammatory substances in their blood.

This genetic predisposition, along with external and personal factors such as inadequate dietary habits or physical inactivity, predispose patients to obesity and the complications that arise from it (diabetes, hypercholesterolemia and high blood pressure) which in turn increase cardiovascular risk.

..."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Custom diets on the way? Berry, berry interesting.

[endless october]

1. i have had inflammatory disorders in the past, and was obese a couple times in my life.

not that i feel my one data point can be extrapolated into a conclusion, but it fits the article.

i did lose the weight, but i gain easily and have stay on top of my weight daily to prevent spikes. so far, so good.

[Warpy]

2. Well, I have several alphabet soup autoimmune diseases

so I'm totally fucked right out of the starting gate. I guess my idea to give up on the whole diet idea was the right one, given I'll be on prednisone for the rest of my life.

It's nice they're finally studying this stuff instead of taking the moralist side and accusing us all of gluttony.

[Chemisse]

13. Yes it is very nice

And I am waiting for the time when these skinny 'moralists' have to eat their words.

[KT2000]

3. Fat is the body's storehouse

for the fat soluble chemicals we are exposed to in our life. If a person is genetically wired to be a slow processor of those chemicals they will store even more of them.
Pesticides, for example are stored in fat tissue of living things, including the meat we eat. Some of these are endocrine disrupting chemicals.
These substances are released into the bloodstream during dieting and stress. Inflammation and other disorders can result.

Fat is not just fat, it is the accumulation of our historical exposures.

please push your elected representatives for more health studies on the chemicals we are exposed to - and get started immediately on the research of endocrine disrupting chemicals.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. +10

[paulsby]

4. old news, repackaged

sports scientists and those in the know have been saying this for DECADES. people are... wait for it... different. different hormonal milieus, different digestive efficiencies, different setpoints, different metabolisms, etc.

for example. keto diets work GREAT for some people and not so well for others. ornish type diets, the same can be said. look at the different response to high glycemics, etc.

the same thing is seen in bodybuilding. some people grow like a weed on HIT type training, and others fail miserably. some see great hypertrophic response from higher reps and shorter rest period. other's don't

[HuckleB]

5. We are only now able to study this in this manner.

Past guesses may have been partially right, but that hardly makes this old news.

[paulsby]

6. it's old news, repackaged

the soviets for instance have done a LOT of study of diets, performance, and fat loss/gain.

what i'm saying is that this is like those studies that say obvious things about things that have been endlessly reconfirmed throughout history, but are repackaged as some sort of breakthrough

i don't need a study to tell me that men on average are taller than women, for example

[HuckleB]

8. That's interesting.

So the technology that allows for such research was available to the Soviets? And you know this how?

[paulsby]

9. i didn't say they had the same technology

to do this particular study. but they came to the same conclusion with large empirical studies. those are relatively easy to do in totalitarian countries, where you have literally hundreds of thousands of athletes to experiment on.

i don't read russian, so i have relied on bud charniga for translation of these texts.

the soviets were FAR FAR ahead of our conventional medical establishment when it came to sports science. remember that up until recently, the AMA didn't even concede that steroids worked to build muscle, claiming it was placebo effect. they claimed this for DECADES after soviets employed such modalities in their sports system

[HuckleB]

10. Perhaps within range, they had similar conclusions.

But again, not with the detailed understanding that we can get to today.

And science has reversed itself as time moves on, and therapies can use all the detail they can get.

If you lack the curiosity to care about science, why do you bother posting on the health forum?

[paulsby]

11. i just find it amusing

when the conventional medical establishment, especially in western countries, does studies and "reveal" what has been known for decades amongst sports scientists, and especially the soviets and eastern europeans. there's a bit of bias there as well, in that one can't trust stuff coming from there.

to say i don't care about science is silly, since i spend hours a week on medscape/medline etc. reading studies (and admittedly often just abstracts) in order to keep current.

when it comes to nutrition science, and to a lesser extent, sports science, western medical establishment is just woefully behind the times. recall that not too long ago they were spouting the frigging food pyramid crap, that supplemental vitamin tablets had no effect whatsoever, and that all fats are bad fats

JAMA has done some ridiculously bogus studies, for instance, for example their famous (among athletes) study that "proved" the ineffectiveness of diones and diols that patrick arnold had innovated.

[HuckleB]

12. Again, you're offering an inaccurate assessment.

What science "knows" is constantly changing, AND being added to. If you think for a minute that the detail that can be had today is no greater than it was in the good old days, you're off base. And I don't find that amusing at all.

[Chemisse]

14. A lot of new understandings seem to be coming out all the time

About the causes of obesity. While the basic concept of individuality may be old, the details are new - and pretty exciting really.