Personalized dieting?? Maybe we really are all special snowflakes ;)
Options
Replies
-
tincanonastring wrote: »I kind of take issue with the "obesity is a symptom of a health problem." Obesity is a symptom of eating more calories than you burn for an extended time period. Health problems can affect how much your body burns, but you still wouldn't become obese without the excess calories.
That's true. But some, well me anyways, had my weight affected by how I felt. Food was being used for energy and better health. I got the shakes every couple of hours so I ate. I was exhausted so I had a carb/sugar snack, and when I crashed from that I had another. I had inflammatory arthritis (which I now know was made worse by sugars) so I could not exercise.
Illness did not magically place pounds on me but it did contribute to my over eating. When I felt well, the weight would start slipping off again.
It's just my n=1, but I'm guessing I'm not too unusual.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »I kind of take issue with the "obesity is a symptom of a health problem." Obesity is a symptom of eating more calories than you burn for an extended time period. Health problems can affect how much your body burns, but you still wouldn't become obese without the excess calories.
Moi - I think it's a leap because we know obesity plays a large role in those health issues yet we don't know a) the extent to which blood sugar plays a role in causing diabetes and heart disease (although I'm open to reading up on it you have material to the contrary), b) whether there even are significant differences in our individual metabolic processes related to blood sugar, and c) if those differences do exist, whether they are great enough to cause a change in the probability of a person coming down with those diseases.
It's all speculation at this point when it comes to "special snowflake hypothesis*" whereas we know that controlling weight will lower a person's likelihood of diabetes and heart problems.
*I'm not actually calling anyone a special snowflake; I'm just using the term for convenience.
There are a lot of thin people with diabetes, so it seems obvious that there is more to this than simply weight. That's why the research continues...to get a better understanding of ALL the relevant factors and how they interact.
It seems extremely short sighted to ignore the research just because every question has not yet been answered.0 -
I didn't say ignore any research. I even said upthread that I'm interested in the results. What I said was that the statement, " it could influence whether you develop diabetes or heart disease or many other diseases" was a leap. No questions have actually been answered yet when it comes this subject, which is why it's all speculation until further research is conducted.0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »I didn't say ignore any research. I even said upthread that I'm interested in the results. What I said was that the statement, " it could influence whether you develop diabetes or heart disease or many other diseases" was a leap. No questions have actually been answered yet when it comes this subject, which is why it's all speculation until further research is conducted.
High blood sugar is linked to diabetes...that is pretty well established. That is hardly a leap.
What this particular study seems to indicate is that the same food can cause very different blood sugar responses in different people. They need to do more research to figure out exactly what is going on.
0 -
Where are you getting "very different?" That's the part that I feel is a leap. I don't see anything out there that supports this. Could you please point me to it?
ETA: High blood sugar doesn't cause diabetes, as far as I'm aware. It's a symptom of IR because the glucose is not cleared via insulin response, correct? I don't claim to have full knowledge here, so please feel free to provide some source material if you feel I'm incorrect. I'd love to read further.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Where are you getting "very different?" That's the part that I feel is a leap. I don't see anything out there that supports this. Could you please point me to it?
ETA: High blood sugar doesn't cause diabetes, as far as I'm aware. It's a symptom of IR because the glucose is not cleared via insulin response, correct? I don't claim to have full knowledge here, so please feel free to provide some source material if you feel I'm incorrect. I'd love to read further.
From the article the OP linked:"Certain foods cause too much sugar to flow into the bloodstream, and this too-high level of glucose in the blood is what can lead to things like diabetes and obesity. But what foods do this? This is part of the point of nutrition guidelines, to recommend the foods least likely to cause this potentially dangerous spike in blood glucose.
But from their data, Segal and Elinav could see that the people in their study were responding to similar foods in wildly different ways. “Already, we could see at a very large scale that, indeed, for any food we looked at, we could see a huge variability in the response,” Segal said. “Some people, you give them sugar and they have a very faint response — even to pure sugar. Whereas others, they have a huge response. And this holds for basically every food that we examined.” And there were more surprises. “Some individuals, they eat whole-wheat rice and their blood-sugar levels remain low, and when they eat ice cream they spike,” Segal said. But for others the results showed just the opposite."
It has not been established as fact yet what causes diabetes. Yes, obesity is highly correlated with diabetes, but there is no actual proof that obesity causes diabetes. And even if it is a cause, it is clearly not operating alone. That's why I think research like this is interesting.0 -
I am no expert, but I have read a lot and talked to doctors because of my family history. Granted, this is just the opinions of two people, but I include it as a data point. I have talked to my doctor, and a friend who is an endocrinologist, about the diabetes risk issue. They both seem to think that the most likely (in their opinions...as I said nobody knows for sure at this point) explanation is it some combination of genetic predisposition and various lifestyle choices...including both weight and the specific diet. Btw, the endocrinologist is a Harvard educated, top fellowship, excellent credentials type...not that that necessarily proves anything, but...tincanonastring wrote: »ETA: High blood sugar doesn't cause diabetes, as far as I'm aware. It's a symptom of IR because the glucose is not cleared via insulin response, correct? I don't claim to have full knowledge here, so please feel free to provide some source material if you feel I'm incorrect. I'd love to read further.
0 -
MoiAussi93 wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »I kind of take issue with the "obesity is a symptom of a health problem." Obesity is a symptom of eating more calories than you burn for an extended time period. Health problems can affect how much your body burns, but you still wouldn't become obese without the excess calories.
Moi - I think it's a leap because we know obesity plays a large role in those health issues yet we don't know a) the extent to which blood sugar plays a role in causing diabetes and heart disease (although I'm open to reading up on it you have material to the contrary), b) whether there even are significant differences in our individual metabolic processes related to blood sugar, and c) if those differences do exist, whether they are great enough to cause a change in the probability of a person coming down with those diseases.
It's all speculation at this point when it comes to "special snowflake hypothesis*" whereas we know that controlling weight will lower a person's likelihood of diabetes and heart problems.
*I'm not actually calling anyone a special snowflake; I'm just using the term for convenience.
There are a lot of thin people with diabetes, so it seems obvious that there is more to this than simply weight. That's why the research continues...to get a better understanding of ALL the relevant factors and how they interact.
It seems extremely short sighted to ignore the research just because every question has not yet been answered.
There were people with diabetes before the current period, of course. The issue right now is that the rate has gone way up, almost certainly due to the obesity rate. What percentage of people with diabetes currently aren't obese or overweight? It would be interesting to compare that to the more traditional rate of diabetes in this society (and perhaps in some others)?
Also, how is the diabetes rate in societies with a traditional low fat/high carb diet, like Japan? (And no, pointing to changes related to countries adopting a more western diet isn't the issue, I'm asking about with their traditional diet.)
Given the wide range of traditional diets and macro percentages -- more higher carb than very low carb -- I think the endless obsession at MFP with macro percentage being all that and the preaching about low carb being healthier is tiresome. If it works for you, great. More likely the reason low carb seems healthier for some is that it helps them eat a healthier and more calorie appropriate diet within the context of the current environment, and not some inherent problem with carbs (which is basically to say with plant-based foods).0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »I kind of take issue with the "obesity is a symptom of a health problem." Obesity is a symptom of eating more calories than you burn for an extended time period. Health problems can affect how much your body burns, but you still wouldn't become obese without the excess calories.
Moi - I think it's a leap because we know obesity plays a large role in those health issues yet we don't know a) the extent to which blood sugar plays a role in causing diabetes and heart disease (although I'm open to reading up on it you have material to the contrary), b) whether there even are significant differences in our individual metabolic processes related to blood sugar, and c) if those differences do exist, whether they are great enough to cause a change in the probability of a person coming down with those diseases.
It's all speculation at this point when it comes to "special snowflake hypothesis*" whereas we know that controlling weight will lower a person's likelihood of diabetes and heart problems.
*I'm not actually calling anyone a special snowflake; I'm just using the term for convenience.
There are a lot of thin people with diabetes, so it seems obvious that there is more to this than simply weight. That's why the research continues...to get a better understanding of ALL the relevant factors and how they interact.
It seems extremely short sighted to ignore the research just because every question has not yet been answered.
There were people with diabetes before the current period, of course. The issue right now is that the rate has gone way up, almost certainly due to the obesity rate. What percentage of people with diabetes currently aren't obese or overweight? It would be interesting to compare that to the more traditional rate of diabetes in this society (and perhaps in some others)?
Also, how is the diabetes rate in societies with a traditional low fat/high carb diet, like Japan? (And no, pointing to changes related to countries adopting a more western diet isn't the issue, I'm asking about with their traditional diet.)
Given the wide range of traditional diets and macro percentages -- more higher carb than very low carb -- I think the endless obsession at MFP with macro percentage being all that and the preaching about low carb being healthier is tiresome. If it works for you, great. More likely the reason low carb seems healthier for some is that it helps them eat a healthier and more calorie appropriate diet within the context of the current environment, and not some inherent problem with carbs (which is basically to say with plant-based foods).
This thread is not about low carb diets at all, so I'm honestly not sure what your response is even about or how to respond to it.
The article the OP linked talked about a study which seems to indicate that the same food can impact different people in different ways, so there is no one perfect diet. What works for one person may not suit another at all. All of my responses indicate that I think that is very plausible.0 -
People who are suffering from ailments, disorders or disease would benefit on some personal dieting strategies. If we're talking about the general population, I don't think there's enough evidence to support having a special personalized diet for weight loss.
Doing this for years with average people and even some competitive athletes, it basically still boils down to calories in/out when it comes to weight loss/gain/maintenance. It's rare that I've had to have a RD collaborate with me on a client and even then, we're speaking of people who usually had some health issue.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
goldthistime wrote: »Interesting stuff. The problem with paying what I imagine would be a hefty price for an individualized diet plan based on your stool sample is that your gut bacteria can change, based on diet among other things. But I have to say that I am fascinated by this stuff. One of my daughter's classes last year was on gut bacteria and I'm tempted to take it myself.
Yeah, they even do gut bacteria transplants.
I do think genetic testing may one day show tendencies for some gut bacteria over others.
I think genetic testing for what to eat for health will be the big individualization.0 -
MoiAussi93 wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »It's majoring in the minors. May have some small effect, but most people struggling with weight loss are just eating too much. No point in tweaking until you've got the big stuff right.
You're missing a big part of the point...It's not just about obesity...that's just one area of interest...it's about health in general. How a food impacts you doesn't just influence your weight, it could influence whether you develop diabetes or heart disease or many other diseases. That's hardly majoring in the minors.
That bolded bit is a pretty huge leap.
No, it's not actually a leap at all. Blood sugar levels have been linked to these diseases. And what they are studying is whether certain foods impact blood sugar levels to a greater extent in some people than in others. The results so far indicate that they do...of course, more research is needed.
Meh. My doctor says otherwise, so I'll follow her lead. I have diabetes both T1 and T2 in my family. The best way that is managed is by managing my weight. I am at a lesser risk of diabetes and heart disease because I am at a healthy weight and am active/fit on a daily basis.
Obesity isn't just one area of interest, it is the core.
Meh. My doctor disagrees with yours, so I'll follow her lead. I also have diabetes in my family, and my doctor believes there is more to it than simply weight. Diet matters.
Diet does matter. Absolutely. A diet of eating less than you burn. Or a diet of eating what you burn.
As someone who at maintenance is eating a crap ton of carbs, I'd love to see your doctor explain why or how I am still risking diabetes when my blood sugar numbers are incredibly healthy and normal.
Anyways, I am moving on. Every single thread on ways of eating doesn't need to turn into low carb is the only way to prevent diabetes. It's unnecessary IMO.
I'm not sure how you think this thread or article is about low carb. Your experience tends to support the idea that for some people carbs and sugar don't have the same effect as for others.0 -
I went from normal weight to class II obese and back down to normal. Is it likely that my gut bacteria started behaving differently at the exact same moment I started eating in a deficit? Seems pretty unlikely.0
-
MoiAussi93 wrote: »It makes sense. We already know different people react differently to various foods. People have various degrees of lactose intolerance, gluten sensitivity, various food allergies, etc. This is a little different, but in that same vein. I do think it is very possible that different people might do better on one diet vs another. Whether these gut bacteria differences that they are focusing on are due to racial or ethnic variations, or just random genetic differences, I find it very interesting.
I wondered this as well, but the article mentions that identical twins can have different reactions to the same foods.0 -
goldthistime wrote: »Interesting stuff. The problem with paying what I imagine would be a hefty price for an individualized diet plan based on your stool sample is that your gut bacteria can change, based on diet among other things. But I have to say that I am fascinated by this stuff. One of my daughter's classes last year was on gut bacteria and I'm tempted to take it myself.
Yeah, they even do gut bacteria transplants.
I do think genetic testing may one day show tendencies for some gut bacteria over others.
I think genetic testing for what to eat for health will be the big individualization.
I have read about fecal transplants. I would do in a heartbeat if I found myself with a c. diff infection. Or an IBS bout that I couldn't shake.
Our genetic makeup may be well be the best predictor of which diet plan we should follow, but maybe not. I have read that your gut bacteria composition will change if you follow a certain kind of diet for a period of time (low fat, low carb, more meat, no meat etc). One of the reasons I believe it, is that there is a transition period when you start to follow a strange new way of eating, but after a while, it feels normal. My gut reaction to this,
, is that a change in your gut flora is a big part of establishing your new normal. How much can we alter our genetic predisposition to have certain types/quantities of gut bacteria? (The classic nature/nurture debate. Often I side on the nature/genetic predisposition side, this time I'm leaning toward the environment side). Not sure that science can tell us yet, but if you come across any studies on the topic, please share.
0 -
goldthistime wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »Interesting stuff. The problem with paying what I imagine would be a hefty price for an individualized diet plan based on your stool sample is that your gut bacteria can change, based on diet among other things. But I have to say that I am fascinated by this stuff. One of my daughter's classes last year was on gut bacteria and I'm tempted to take it myself.
Yeah, they even do gut bacteria transplants.
I do think genetic testing may one day show tendencies for some gut bacteria over others.
I think genetic testing for what to eat for health will be the big individualization.
I have read about fecal transplants. I would do in a heartbeat if I found myself with a c. diff infection. Or an IBS bout that I couldn't shake.
Our genetic makeup may be well be the best predictor of which diet plan we should follow, but maybe not. I have read that your gut bacteria composition will change if you follow a certain kind of diet for a period of time (low fat, low carb, more meat, no meat etc). One of the reasons I believe it, is that there is a transition period when you start to follow a strange new way of eating, but after a while, it feels normal. My gut reaction to this, , is that a change in your gut flora is a big part of establishing your new normal. How much can we alter our genetic predisposition to have certain types/quantities of gut bacteria? (The classic nature/nurture debate. Often I side on the nature/genetic predisposition side, this time I'm leaning toward the environment side). Not sure that science can tell us yet, but if you come across any studies on the topic, please share.
There have been studies on the effect diet has on gut bacteria, and the outcome was a little surprising.
http://www.livescience.com/41869-gut-bacteria-change-diet.html
"In the study, participants who switched from their normal diet to eating only animal products, including meat, cheese and eggs, saw their gut bacteria change rapidly — within one day."0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »I went from normal weight to class II obese and back down to normal. Is it likely that my gut bacteria started behaving differently at the exact same moment I started eating in a deficit? Seems pretty unlikely.
I don't think this study leads to the conclusion that gut bacteria is the only (or even primary) factor is weight loss. Of course you lost weight because you were eating at a deficit.
I myself question the article's repeated attempts to tie gut bacteria differences to the "increasing threat posed by diabetes and obesity." I think they make a good case for gut bacteria's effect on blood sugar spikes, but I don't see much to link it directly to obesity. Where I think the value in this research lies is in health-based diets as opposed to weight loss.0 -
That's why, as others said, it's majoring in the minors.missblondi2u wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »I went from normal weight to class II obese and back down to normal. Is it likely that my gut bacteria started behaving differently at the exact same moment I started eating in a deficit? Seems pretty unlikely.
I don't think this study leads to the conclusion that gut bacteria is the only (or even primary) factor is weight loss. Of course you lost weight because you were eating at a deficit.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
That's why, as others said, it's majoring in the minors.missblondi2u wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »I went from normal weight to class II obese and back down to normal. Is it likely that my gut bacteria started behaving differently at the exact same moment I started eating in a deficit? Seems pretty unlikely.
I don't think this study leads to the conclusion that gut bacteria is the only (or even primary) factor is weight loss. Of course you lost weight because you were eating at a deficit.
I get what you're saying, but I just don't think health is a minor issue. If all a person cares about is weight loss, I suppose this research would mean little to them.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 938 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions