People who think fat is not a genetics issue
Boofuls
Posts: 47 Member
How do you explain this?
In a seminal series of experiments published in the 1990s, the Canadian researchers Claude Bouchard and Angelo Tremblay studied 31 pairs of male twins ranging in age from 17 to 29, who were sometimes overfed and sometimes put on diets. (None of the twin pairs were at risk for obesity based on their body mass or their family history.) In one study, 12 sets of the twins were put under 24-hour supervision in a college dormitory. Six days a week they ate 1,000 extra calories a day, and one day they were allowed to eat normally. They could read, play video games, play cards and watch television, but exercise was limited to one 30-minute daily walk. Over the course of the 120-day study, the twins consumed 84,000 extra calories beyond their basic needs.
That experimental binge should have translated into a weight gain of roughly 24 pounds (based on 3,500 calories to a pound). But some gained less than 10 pounds, while others gained as much as 29 pounds. The amount of weight gained and how the fat was distributed around the body closely matched among brothers, but varied considerably among the different sets of twins. Some brothers gained three times as much fat around their abdomens as others, for instance. When the researchers conducted similar exercise studies with the twins, they saw the patterns in reverse, with some twin sets losing more pounds than others on the same exercise regimen. The findings, the researchers wrote, suggest a form of “biological determinism” that can make a person susceptible to weight gain or loss.
It's a genuine question. I am beginning to feel absolutely destined to always be fat. There is a 90% plus chance of putting it all back on and then some if I do shift it. Maybe I'm just having a bad day :frown:
In a seminal series of experiments published in the 1990s, the Canadian researchers Claude Bouchard and Angelo Tremblay studied 31 pairs of male twins ranging in age from 17 to 29, who were sometimes overfed and sometimes put on diets. (None of the twin pairs were at risk for obesity based on their body mass or their family history.) In one study, 12 sets of the twins were put under 24-hour supervision in a college dormitory. Six days a week they ate 1,000 extra calories a day, and one day they were allowed to eat normally. They could read, play video games, play cards and watch television, but exercise was limited to one 30-minute daily walk. Over the course of the 120-day study, the twins consumed 84,000 extra calories beyond their basic needs.
That experimental binge should have translated into a weight gain of roughly 24 pounds (based on 3,500 calories to a pound). But some gained less than 10 pounds, while others gained as much as 29 pounds. The amount of weight gained and how the fat was distributed around the body closely matched among brothers, but varied considerably among the different sets of twins. Some brothers gained three times as much fat around their abdomens as others, for instance. When the researchers conducted similar exercise studies with the twins, they saw the patterns in reverse, with some twin sets losing more pounds than others on the same exercise regimen. The findings, the researchers wrote, suggest a form of “biological determinism” that can make a person susceptible to weight gain or loss.
It's a genuine question. I am beginning to feel absolutely destined to always be fat. There is a 90% plus chance of putting it all back on and then some if I do shift it. Maybe I'm just having a bad day :frown:
0
Replies
-
I think genetic factors play a role in fat loss.
I think anyone assuming that it's all genetics and not at all behavioral, is fooling themselves quite badly. I'm not suggesting you are doing this.
You cannot control your genetics.
You CAN control your lifestyle choices, and fortunately time and time again when we see examples of people who sustain caloric deficits, they lose weight. So fortunately there is something that can be done about it.0 -
I think you should take the study with a pinch of salt, some people will lose weight faster yes but it doesn't mean you can't, everyone is different
I saw somewhere that there's about 12 genes which are linked with having a higher weight but there's thousands of cases of people who have several of these who are completely healthy. Generally the genetic side causes you to overeat more rather than affect metabolism I think, so if you're tracking food you should be fine! It looks like you're making excellent progress so I wouldn't worry about it, maybe you have to work a little harder or longer at it but you'll get there. 0 -
Some people do have a propensity to gain weight easier and quicker than others. So? If you don't eat in excess of what you burn then you won't gain weight. Genetics cant defy the laws of physics.
At the end of the day, you have to stop overeating. No one is 'destined' to overeat.0 -
You are all correct and I sort of know this intellectually. I think maybe it's just that emotionally I am struggling with being on a diet (as in counting calories) for the rest of my life.
I need to man up really.0 -
After lots of research I have concluded this. You're making it way more complicated than it needs to be. Yes, genetics screwing up your weight loss are a real thing. And yes there are people that can practically eat whatever they want and not get as insanely fat as you or me. But it also doesn't stop you from losing weight unless you have a serious medical condition.
Bad genetics is basically your body's way of saying you're gonna have to work harder to get the results you want. Not that it's impossible, just a little more difficult. That's all. Some people might lose weight a little faster but the formula for weight loss is ridiculously easy. Eat less calories than you burn. Boom. Simple right? You do that and pretty much no matter what the weight will come off. No excuses. Do it!0 -
You are all correct and I sort of know this intellectually. I think maybe it's just that emotionally I am struggling with being on a diet (as in counting calories) for the rest of my life.
I need to man up really.
I also don't know that you necessarily need to count calories for the rest of your life. It stands to reason that you may get to a place eventually, with your diet and your training, that you're able to learn how to eat intuitively and maintain body weight within a range that you are satisfied with.0 -
Sure, there's genetic susceptibility, however it requires a diet high in calories to actually see the weight gain happen. In very few cases is extreme overweight totally attributable to genetics... most cases are self-inflicted. Whatever the cause, excess weight is something that needs to be addressed, rather than giving up and blaming it on genetics.0
-
You are all correct and I sort of know this intellectually. I think maybe it's just that emotionally I am struggling with being on a diet (as in counting calories) for the rest of my life.
I need to man up really.
I also don't know that you necessarily need to count calories for the rest of your life. It stands to reason that you may get to a place eventually, with your diet and your training, that you're able to learn how to eat intuitively and maintain body weight within a range that you are satisfied with.
Lots of people are able to eyeball it when they get to their maintenance. I already know how many calories most things I eat are, so when I get to maintenance this stuff should be easy peasy. I don't look at it as some stressful "counting calories" thing, just knowing how much food I need for the work my body has done that day. Pretty simple. If you laid around at home all day your body probably doesn't need 10 hamburgers before 9am0 -
yes, genetics and disease play an important role in weight gain or loss, however, none of the individuals in that study gained weight at a calorie deficit, nor did they lose weight at a calorie excedant.
As much as these factors play a role - daily activity and the amount of food one eats and the calorie density of that food are significantly more important in the total energy available to produce/reduce fat.
The emotional elements of dieting are also as important as the calorie restriction part, if not more so. Consider how you can do this without the emotional struggle and long term is a major factor to consistency and success.0 -
I agree with your post. I would be the person who gained 29 pounds without being able to lose it quickly. I have always been that way - compared to my friends, I always had to eat less to keep my weight. We are like economical cars, we don't need much gas:laugh:0
-
That experimental binge should have translated into a weight gain of roughly 24 pounds (based on 3,500 calories to a pound). But some gained less than 10 pounds, while others gained as much as 29 pounds.
So the "should have" hypothesis fails ?0 -
Hi Boofuls;
First, congratulations on your 44lb loss! It's true, body composition can be influenced by genetics, but not as much as you may think.
- There's no mention of lean body mass. Twins with higher LBM would burn more calories, even at rest, than a low LBM pair on the same diet.
- Deliberate exercise was limited, but there's no mention of incidental activity levels. Some twins would sit perfectly still and watch TV. Others might throw themselves around playing computer games, having animated conversations and hopping up to get a drink of water every 30 minutes. It skews the measurements.
- Every pair of twins gained weight on the high calorie, low exercise program. Likewise, they all would have lost weight on a low calorie, high exercise program. None of them are doomed to remain at a certain weight.
Bottom line: yes, some people have a genetic advantage, but there is NO gene that will cancel out your calorie deficit. :flowerforyou:
FYI - I do actually have a degree in this (genetics etc.) if that reassures you at all.0 -
Also, I'm assuming you're not locked in a lab being required to eat at a large surplus and limited to a 30 minute walk for exercise. Yeah, it takes time and it takes effort but if you put in the time and effort you'll see results.0
-
There are studies that say the same thing about alcoholism....
But just because there is a history of alcoholism in my family, that doesn't make me an alcoholic!
What makes me an alcoholic is the fact that I drank to excess, became dependent on it to run my life,
and when I got to the point of realizing it was killing me, I couldn't quit to save my life.... that's what made me an alcoholic!
Now, about food, it is basically the same thing, same behavior, same consequences and same results....
When I took control of my behavior, I became free of the obsession and lost the allergy for both....
Thanks for letting me share!0 -
A friend of mine once made a comment about genetics, that as a general rule... it's 10% genetic how you will be and 90% environmental.
Granted she was referring to temperament and attributes of her breeding program (she was breeding hunting dogs and Arabian horses), but it makes sense that this might apply to humans too.
The 10% effecting how well we gain or loss, but it's 90% of what we do that affects us.0 -
The emotional elements of dieting are also as important as the calorie restriction part, if not more so. Consider how you can do this without the emotional struggle and long term is a major factor to consistency and success.
Absolutely spot on.
"Dieting" in the traditional sense where the participant feels constantly deprived on a psychological level and then falls off and then depressingly has to try yet again before the cycle repeats is just about useless.
Feelings of deprivation are quite a personal thing however and finding the right "mix" of foods and in what amounts and combinations where this is minimised to the lowest level possible takes a bit of trial and error.
Calorie counting is effectively a set of training wheels to help you find that blend for most people. Once you have it in place then the need to count falls away.0 -
I think genetic factors play a role in fat loss.
I think anyone assuming that it's all genetics and not at all behavioral, is fooling themselves quite badly. I'm not suggesting you are doing this.
You cannot control your genetics.
You CAN control your lifestyle choices, and fortunately time and time again when we see examples of people who sustain caloric deficits, they lose weight. So fortunately there is something that can be done about it.
QFT.0 -
I think the analogy with alcoholism is a good one actually. Alcoholics are expected to remain fiercely vigilant all their lives, maybe that's the way I need to look at it.
Thank you for the congratulations, I am pleased with my loss. I am just a little tired I think. I had a bad weekend (for all sorts of reasons) and ended up eating way over my goal. It's logged and I am trying to move on and have a good week this week but it rather terrified me how easily I just went overboard.0 -
I also think a part of it, more than genetics....is that were these people overweight in the past...and the bad food behaviors coming from people of the same family. When you have been overweight before, in some cases I do believe (could be wrong) that your body is always itching to get back to that weight...plus fat cells never disappear, they only shrink....so if poor behaviors from the same family caused some of these participants to have been heavier before the experiment, their body may have added the weight on faster as it was it's body's "norm". Folks who have eaten healthily and never been overweight can sometimes maintain/eat a bit more than we would at the same weight.0
-
You are all correct and I sort of know this intellectually. I think maybe it's just that emotionally I am struggling with being on a diet (as in counting calories) for the rest of my life.
I need to man up really.
Even if we have to count calories the rest of our lives and stay more active than others, isn't being fit and healthy worth the effort? Instead of viewing having to do these extra things as depressing, see them as positives. We have the ability and knowledge to change our bodies for the better. We are only destined to remain fat if we choose to. Get your head in the right place. I'm struggling with it too sometimes, but not giving up sure beats the alternative.0 -
- There's no mention of lean body mass. Twins with higher LBM would burn more calories, even at rest, than a low LBM pair on the same diet.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199005243222101
Note that the overfeeding regime fed them each the same amount of excess calories over their measured energy requirement, so the same amount of food.
"Body weight increased significantly (P<0.001) during overfeeding, the average gain being 8.1 kg . Body composition also changed significantly. Fat mass and fat-free mass increased, but the gain in adipose tissue was greater than the increase in lean tissue, as shown by the changes in the ratio of fat mass to fat-free mass, which increased from 0.13 to 0.22 (P<0.001). "
"Although the mean increase in body weight was 8.1 kg, the standard deviation was 2.4 kg and the range 4.3 to 13.3 kg"
- ie there is no evidence from this study for calorie counting.When the results for all 24 men were analyzed, the correlations between the total energy ingested during the 100-day period (including the 84,000-kcal surplus) and the gains in body weight (r = 0.26), fat mass (r = 0.26), sum of 10 skin-fold—thickness measurements (r = 0.25), and abdominal visceral fat (r = −0.31) were not statistically significant.0 -
I absolutely believe genetics play a role.
That doesn't mean you throw your hands up in defeat. You find YOUR intake level and work it. Consistent calorie restriction is effective, genetics or not.
Some people are able to eat more and lose, some must eat a more calorie restrictive diet to lose. I also think some of us will have to count calories for the rest of our lives. I am one of those people and I am fine with it. It's the cost of maintaining my weight loss, and to me, a price I am willing to pay.
Get it done!0 -
I think genetic factors play a role in fat loss.
I think anyone assuming that it's all genetics and not at all behavioral, is fooling themselves quite badly. I'm not suggesting you are doing this.
You cannot control your genetics.
You CAN control your lifestyle choices, and fortunately time and time again when we see examples of people who sustain caloric deficits, they lose weight. So fortunately there is something that can be done about it.
^^^^ this
some people are genetically predisposed to gain fat more easily than others. Some people, due to genetics, will find it harder to lose fat and keep it off than others. But harder doesn't mean impossible, so no-one is condemned to a life of obesity. That should be taken as a positive message, not a negative one. I don't think anyone wants to be condemned to a lifetime of ill health caused by obesity. Acknowledgement from others that it *is* harder for some people IMO is important, because there's nothing worse than really struggling with something then other people acting like your struggle isn't real.0 -
In the long run, does it really matter if genetics play a role? I never doubted this was the case to some extent, but the same conclusion can be made according to the study: OVEREATING makes people gain weight, NOT genetics. Beyond that it's a matter of just how much they will gain when they overeat. About this article, I say, SO WHAT? Eat less and move more. This equation has not changed.0
-
- There's no mention of lean body mass. Twins with higher LBM would burn more calories, even at rest, than a low LBM pair on the same diet.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199005243222101
Note that the overfeeding regime fed them each the same amount of excess calories over their measured energy requirement, so the same amount of food.
"Body weight increased significantly (P<0.001) during overfeeding, the average gain being 8.1 kg . Body composition also changed significantly. Fat mass and fat-free mass increased, but the gain in adipose tissue was greater than the increase in lean tissue, as shown by the changes in the ratio of fat mass to fat-free mass, which increased from 0.13 to 0.22 (P<0.001). "
"Although the mean increase in body weight was 8.1 kg, the standard deviation was 2.4 kg and the range 4.3 to 13.3 kg"
- ie there is no evidence from this study for calorie counting.When the results for all 24 men were analyzed, the correlations between the total energy ingested during the 100-day period (including the 84,000-kcal surplus) and the gains in body weight (r = 0.26), fat mass (r = 0.26), sum of 10 skin-fold—thickness measurements (r = 0.25), and abdominal visceral fat (r = −0.31) were not statistically significant.
Thanks for the link, Yarwell!0 -
they also did an exercise one http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.1550-8528.1994.tb00087.x/pdf
using a calorie intake deficit plus exercise protocol. Some interesting variations in fat vs carb burn during exercise, and change in same due to the protocol.
Again the twins responded much more alike each other with much bigger variation between pairs than within.0 -
It's a very interesting study. There was another similar one where people were given an extra 1000 calories a day of alcohol and there was very little weight gain.0
-
At 17 some guys are still growing and they aren't at their final adult size. I think men can keep growing into their early 20s unlike most women who stop getting taller around the mid teens. This one study doesn't mean that you will always be fat. It would be more definitive if the people they used were older instead of adolescents who are still growing.0
-
this ^^I think genetic factors play a role in fat loss.
I think anyone assuming that it's all genetics and not at all behavioral, is fooling themselves quite badly. I'm not suggesting you are doing this.
You cannot control your genetics.
You CAN control your lifestyle choices, and fortunately time and time again when we see examples of people who sustain caloric deficits, they lose weight. So fortunately there is something that can be done about it.
because really, what does it matter? it's like i will say that due to my genetics, i am destined to have bad eyesight and teeth. so should i not get glasses? should i walk around bumping into people and then say "oops, it's not me, it's my genes"? no. you do what you got to do to overcome whatever less desirable genes you got.
and really - i understand the need that scientists have to check things out but purposely making young men gain weight? that sounds like a really smart idea:noway:0 -
It matters because if it really is unrealistic for me to lose and keep the weight off it is probably healthier to just maintain at current weight rather than put my body through the stress of repeated gains and losses. I am going to keep trying though, I am vain enough to shoot for a small chance of normal looking.
Argh, I should probably ban myself from posting here today, i don't actually want to bring you all down.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions