The Truth about Obesity - BBC 1 Now

[AdamJames]

I don't know if I'm naturally a pessimist, but the 'great news' that a drug could be on the way which mimicks the effect of bariatric surgery just gave me a sinking feeling. It just seems too good to be true. Things like that always seem to go very very wrong a few years down the line. But who knows, Metformin seems to be a wonder drug from some people, if not everyone, so maybe something truly amazing is on the horizon.

 

[bulkbiker]

I don't know if I'm naturally a pessimist, but the 'great news' that a drug could be on the way which mimicks the effect of bariatric surgery just gave me a sinking feeling. It just seems too good to be true. Things like that always seem to go very very wrong a few years down the line. But who knows, Metformin seems to be a wonder drug from some people, if not everyone, so maybe something truly amazing is on the horizon.

Doubt it.. but we already know what can be amazing... LCHF/Keto with no meds.. Such a shame that no-one on the program mentioned it. Also while I have some respect for Prof Farouki I think that the genetic case is pure bunkum. Have our genes changed so much over the past 100 years to make so many more people obese? I doubt it very much. She has spent her career looking at this and has found very limited evidence an even fewer people with the gene defects she claims cause obesity.

 

[AdamJames]

Doubt it.. but we already know what can be amazing... LCHF/Keto with no meds.. Such a shame that no-one on the program mentioned it. Also while I have some respect for Prof Farouki I think that the genetic case is pure bunkum. Have our genes changed so much over the past 100 years to make so many more people obese? I doubt it very much. She has spent her career oloking at this and has found very limited evidence an even fewer people with the gene defects she claims cause obesity.

It would certainly be good to have a lot more keto studies being performed and coming into the limelight. I really liked watching 'The Magic Pill' earlier.

I don't do enough reading around, I wasn't aware that the 'genetics woman' on this documentary (was that Prof Farouki?) had a name for herself and I don't know the details of her viewpoint.

Just thinking purely in terms of genetics though rather than any of her beliefs, I don't think it's necessarily the case that our genes need to have changed in the last 100 years in order to back up the idea that there is a large genetic factor in obesity. It could be that the genetic variations that were around 100 years ago are still present, but never led to any observable differences in obesity 100 years ago, but when you add recent rubbish food into our diets, those genetic differences start to have very noticeable / visible differences on the carriers of those genes.

 

[bulkbiker]

It would certainly be good to have a lot more keto studies being performed and coming into the limelight. I really liked watching 'The Magic Pill' earlier.

I don't do enough reading around, I wasn't aware that the 'genetics woman' on this documentary (was that Prof Farouki?) had a name for herself and I don't know the details of her viewpoint.

Just thinking purely in terms of genetics though rather than any of her beliefs, I don't think it's necessarily the case that our genes need to have changed in the last 100 years in order to back up the idea that there is a large genetic factor in obesity. It could be that the genetic variations that were around 100 years ago are still present, but never led to any observable differences in obesity 100 years ago, but when you add recent rubbish food into our diets, those genetic differences start to have very noticeable / visible differences on the carriers of those genes.

So then it becomes the diet rather than the genes and we all know that anyway...
I have read up on her a bit because my drug pushing cousin has met her a few times (he works for Novo Nordisk) and was using her arguments against my keto diet. We are a dispute driven family!

 

[Guzzler]

The science of genetics is in its infancy. There are very few (comparatively speaking) knowns.
In my opinion there is likely to be a cohort of genes involved in obesity and T2 but this must have an element of triggers such as age, dietary habits and gut health etc. What saddened me in particular about what the Prof. said was that there may be some who hear this and think 'I can't change my genes so why bother even trying'.

 

[AdamJames]

So then it becomes the diet rather than the genes and we all know that anyway...
I have read up on her a bit because my drug pushing cousin has met her a few times (he works for Novo Nordisk) and was using her arguments against my keto diet. We are a dispute driven family!

From what I remember of her bit in the documentary wasn't she just saying that due to genetic variation some people are more likely than others to be hungry, and some more likely than others to gain weight even on exactly the same food types and quantities? That much seems plausible to me.

Is she also saying (or has she said elsewhere, not in that documentary) that something fundamental has changed about humans which means, even if the food environment had stayed the same over the last 100 years, there would be an increase in obesity?

I'm not sure I'm following the subtleties of the thought processes here.

I certainly don't see any genetic argument 'against' the keto diet, so your drug pushing cousin sounds like he was being dispute-driven! All I can think is that, in pretty much anything ever measured about humans, we get a sort of bell-curve distribution. If I had to place a bet, from what I've read / watched, I'd say that it would be normal, i.e. centre of the curve, for people to benefit from a keto diet, but some people on one side of the curve would benefit massively from it, and on the other side will be people for whom it is harmful. And I'd guess genetics would be the most obvious explanation as to why each individual lies on the position on the curve that they do.

 

[Guzzler]

As far as I understand it genetic changes happen in two ways. There are those slow changes that happen over hundreds of thousands of years and there are those random mutations that happen in a single or limited number of individuals. Even if the Profs theory is right about the 100 year time scale that really is only four or five generations, not nearly long enough to fit the scale of the current obesity epidemic. Especially when you think of it in terms of geographical area.

 

[dbr10]

It would certainly be good to have a lot more keto studies being performed and coming into the limelight. I really liked watching 'The Magic Pill' earlier.

Me too. Brilliant.

 

[AdamJames]

Even if the Profs theory is right about the 100 year time scale that really is only four or five generations, not nearly long enough to fit the scale of the current obesity epidemic.

Does that mean she is saying that recent genetic changes are a factor in obesity? I think I need to read up on her views as I still think I'm not following. I'll do some reading in the next few days as this sounds interesting.

My own understanding of genetics probably stopped about 5 years ago so I may be behind the times.

I thought it was generally accepted that every time a new individual was produced, there will be copy errors in the DNA, some harmful, some beneficial, and some of no great importance. Apply a certain environment to those variations, such as a new food environment, and if one variant is more favourable to the gene's carriers in that environment then, over many many generations, that variant is likely to become the dominant one.

But I think genetic drift was thought to be a lot more prevalent than it was believed to be many decades ago, i.e. it is accepted that environmental pressures such as a harsh food environment are not always necessary for a certain set of genes to become more widespread than others.

None of these thoughts help me to understand what I may be missing about Genetic Woman's views and what the debate is, I definitely need to read up. If all she is saying is that genetic differences mean some people are more likely to become obese in a given food environment then that doesn't seem controversial to me. Quite the opposite in fact. If everyone performed exactly the same in a given food/temperature/climate/oxygen/anything environment then evolution has stopped working!

 

[lucylocket61]

I wonder if we of the antibiotic generation have got harmed gut flora and that is adding to the problem of both weight gain and insulin resistance as we may have killed off the bacteria we need for our bodies to process the food properly and effectively?

 

[bulkbiker]

I wonder if we of the antibiotic generation have got harmed gut flora and that is adding to the problem of both weight gain and insulin resistance as we may have killed off the bacteria we need for our bodies to process the food properly and effectively?

Or could it may be that we are eating as a whole more processed carbs like bread with bad ingredients and the dread combination of fat and carbs combined...

 

[dbr10]

Does that mean she is saying that recent genetic changes are a factor in obesity? I think I need to read up on her views as I still think I'm not following. I'll do some reading in the next few days as this sounds interesting.

My own understanding of genetics probably stopped about 5 years ago so I may be behind the times.

I thought it was generally accepted that every time a new individual was produced, there will be copy errors in the DNA, some harmful, some beneficial, and some of no great importance. Apply a certain environment to those variations, such as a new food environment, and if one variant is more favourable to the gene's carriers in that environment then, over many many generations, that variant is likely to become the dominant one.

But I think genetic drift was thought to be a lot more prevalent than it was believed to be many decades ago, i.e. it is accepted that environmental pressures such as a harsh food environment are not always necessary for a certain set of genes to become more widespread than others.

None of these thoughts help me to understand what I may be missing about Genetic Woman's views and what the debate is, I definitely need to read up. If all she is saying is that genetic differences mean some people are more likely to become obese in a given food environment then that doesn't seem controversial to me. Quite the opposite in fact. If everyone performed exactly the same in a given food/temperature/climate/oxygen/anything environment then evolution has stopped working!

I agree. Surely, this kind of a timescale is too short to make a difference; and isn't the obvious answer carb consumption?

 

[AdamJames]

I agree. Surely, this kind of a timescale is too short to make a difference; and isn't the obvious answer carb consumption?

I think so many variables in western society have changed over the last few decades that it's hard to correlate any one thing with obesity and say for certain this is the cause.

Private transport, sedentary jobs, pollution, foodstuffs that did not exist until industry found a way to make them, easy availability of calorie-dense foods, commercial drive for hyper-palatable recipes, and dietary advice to avoid fats.

I can see how the carb thing is the thing that gets a lot of focus these days, especially since it's carbs that are toxic once T2 is developed, and we know that excess carbs can be causing toxic insulin levels well before T2 is diagnosed.

It may be an over-simplification however. Plenty of people seem to do fine on carby diets provided they don't become obese.

An interesting question I think is: what if we attempt to 'fix' obesity in society by just switching diets to high fat, low carb? But everything else stays the same: we still have industrial foods, fast food, calorie-dense foods, hyper-palatable foods invented by Big Food to keep us coming back, sedentary jobs etc.

 

[dbr10]

I think so many variables in western society have changed over the last few decades that it's hard to correlate any one thing with obesity and say for certain this is the cause.

Private transport, sedentary jobs, pollution, foodstuffs that did not exist until industry found a way to make them, easy availability of calorie-dense foods, commercial drive for hyper-palatable recipes, and dietary advice to avoid fats.

I can see how the carb thing is the thing that gets a lot of focus these days, especially since it's carbs that are toxic once T2 is developed, and we know that excess carbs can be causing toxic insulin levels well before T2 is diagnosed.

It may be an over-simplification however. Plenty of people seem to do fine on carby diets provided they don't become obese.

An interesting question I think is: what if we attempt to 'fix' obesity in society by just switching diets to high fat, low carb? But everything else stays the same: we still have industrial foods, fast food, calorie-dense foods, hyper-palatable foods invented by Big Food to keep us coming back, sedentary jobs etc.

That's a good point. We have to look at a multifactorial approach rather than jumping on just one thing. Same for carbs as for genetics.

 

[Grant_Vicat]

In a class of 16 boys in 1966, I was the only diabetic, Type 1. Four boys would definitely be classed as seriously obese in today's terms, but 'experts' would have us believe that this is a modern crisis. Obesity was not the focus of attention then. Sex, drugs (the hard ones and smoking*), and rock-and-roll were very much to the fore. There was seriously junk sliced bread, squash and fish-fingers which had orange "poster paint" in, but there were greengrocers, fishmongers, bakers and grocers everywhere. Plastic bags and packaging were a dream. And you could get a refund for returning glass bottles. Also television did not exist in "every household", let alone gadgets which would allow you to stay in the armchair. Female models were not skeletons, beauty accessories and treatments for men would have been deemed narcissistic and there was not the terrifying pressure for all teenagers to look the same, even though fashion had clear guidelines for adherents. Mods-and Rockers. beatniks and teddy-boys added to the blend. I sometimes wonder whether the disapproval and lecturing of today's society leads to despair and depression which so often fuel obesity.There are so many factors that could have a bearing, including the fact that anybody with diabetes would die before 1921, unless they were incredibly lucky to have an outstanding doctor within range who happened to know that Carbohydrates were not good for what is now known as Type 2. As for all the other types, we're only just beginning to label and understand them. Genetics is a very modern science in real terms.

*We were shown a cine film of a 42 year old man trying to walk up 3 steps with great difficulty. He looked at least 20 years older and was a heavy smoker.

EDIT As is so often the case, another post appears as I press the button. Most of this has been admirably put by @AdamJames above

 

[ickihun]

The presenter, apart from being pretty, certainly doesn't look like the image often portrayed in the media as the typical obese (in his case right on the border of obese) person. He's the same height and BMI as me at the moment. I like that he was the 'face of obesity' for this programme. The more and more I think about how I look and how people I see e.g. at work look, obese / very overweight can very often look "normal". A lot of people can carry weight well, and you have to study them from the side / especially when sitting down to see the problem - all that visceral fat.

I've had two doctors now, knowing I am Type 2, tell me that I don't need to lose weight. They hadn't weighed me, they just went off how I look from the front, and, presumably, their own body image prejudice which is hard to forgive in a doctor, and quite probably delayed my initial diagnosis by 3 months - I ended up diagnosing myself.

I used to genuinely believe people at work were being polite when they said I was looking 'trim' last year. Very recently, someone said I can't afford to lose any more weight. I had to turn to the side, relax my stomach as much as possible and squeeze it with my hands to convince them I still have a ton of fat I can use up.

Crikey, when I sit down I can feel my man-boobs resting on my big barrel of fat that is my stomach. And I know from my weight 20 years ago when I was very fit that I am carrying several stone of fat I don't need - it's certainly not muscle!

Anyway apart from all the science stuff the prettiness and body shape of the presenter may help people to realise that 'weight issues' are normal in our society, it's easy for it to creep on without us realising, it can affect us all. I certainly wish I'd heard of the piece-of-string test earlier and was aware of just how unhealthy visceral fat can be. That's not to say that I would definitely have taken action years ago and managed to avoid T2 - given the genetic elements at play it can be impossible to avoid. It's a battle that's worth fighting however and the best time to start is long before diagnosis.

I think a lot of people watching this program who will otherwise have thought they were not on track for obesity-related health issues will probably think twice, and it could come down as much to the way the presenter looked as any of the things discussed in the show.

Your drs are adving no more weight lose for a good reason.
If your pancreas stops working due to exhaustion of being a type2 then you will lose weight before insulin injections curb the weight loss.
They are thinking ahead.
However, now in knowledge yourself of low carbing then you know better and know your helping/preventing exhaustion by not overworking it. In fact you may be able to but your diabetes in remission.
Not sure if remission still stops exhaustion as not enough people in remission to hold sure studies...... Yet!
More bariatric surgery remissions and low carb remissions will soon be able to provide important results. Let's hope.

 

[ickihun]

In a class of 16 boys in 1966, I was the only diabetic, Type 1. Four boys would definitely be classed as seriously obese in today's terms, but 'experts' would have us believe that this is a modern crisis. Obesity was not the focus of attention then. Sex, drugs (the hard ones and smoking*), and rock-and-roll were very much to the fore. There was seriously junk sliced bread, squash and fish-fingers which had orange "poster paint" in, but there were greengrocers, fishmongers, bakers and grocers everywhere. Plastic bags and packaging were a dream. And you could get a refund for returning glass bottles. Also television did not exist in "every household", let alone gadgets which would allow you to stay in the armchair. Female models were not skeletons, beauty accessories and treatments for men would have been deemed narcissistic and there was not the terrifying pressure for all teenagers to look the same, even though fashion had clear guidelines for adherents. Mods-and Rockers. beatniks and teddy-boys added to the blend. I sometimes wonder whether the disapproval and lecturing of today's society leads to despair and depression which so often fuel obesity.There are so many factors that could have a bearing, including the fact that anybody with diabetes would die before 1921, unless they were incredibly lucky to have an outstanding doctor within range who happened to know that Carbohydrates were not good for what is now known as Type 2. As for all the other types, we're only just beginning to label and understand them. Genetics is a very modern science in real terms.

*We were shown a cine film of a 42 year old man trying to walk up 3 steps with great difficulty. He looked at least 20 years older and was a heavy smoker.

EDIT As is so often the case, another post appears as I press the button. Most of this has been admirably put by @AdamJames above

I agree. My mum was obese all her life, still is... but not diabetic.

 

[AdamJames]

Your drs are adving no more weight lose for a good reason.

No doctor has advised against me losing weight as such, there were just two notable examples where they hadn't weighed me but for some reason they said I don't need to lose weight. I presumed it was just body image prejudice - they were used to people with T2 looking a certain way and somehow thought I was an exception to the rule. But no, I am obese, and have a huge amount of visceral fat. If I ever get to my target weight, I will not be able to lift a rucksack that contains the weight I will have lost.

My current GP, who has weighed me, and continues to weigh me every other visit, has suggested losing weight might help.

In my position there is every reason to lose weight - I want to enjoy my hobbies more and being lighter helps. If I get lucky it will also have with glucose control, and I may even experience the magic point at which beta cells start working again, who knows?

 

[ickihun]

No doctor has advised against me losing weight as such, there were just two notable examples where they hadn't weighed me but for some reason they said I don't need to lose weight. I presumed it was just body image prejudice - they were used to people with T2 looking a certain way and somehow thought I was an exception to the rule. But no, I am obese, and have a huge amount of visceral fat. If I ever get to my target weight, I will not be able to lift a rucksack that contains the weight I will have lost.

My current GP, who has weighed me, and continues to weigh me every other visit, has suggested losing weight might help.

In my position there is every reason to lose weight - I want to enjoy my hobbies more and being lighter helps. If I get lucky it will also have with glucose control, and I may even experience the magic point at which beta cells start working again, who knows?

Have you tried supplement R-ala for your insulin finding it's pathway? It's a great anti-oxident. Brilliant for nerve health too.

 

[AdamJames]

Have you tried supplement R-ala for your insulin finding it's pathway? It's a great anti-oxident. Brilliant for nerve health too.

No, I haven't done anything subtle yet. I'm keeping things simple and seeing if there's any measurable progress in a month. I'll bear than in mind, thank you.