naturally thin people
Replies
-
Lol, you guys are funny. I am 5' 7, 105-110, and in high school. The walking I do is at school and guess what I do when I get home. I lay down and eat tv dinners, snacks, and then around 8:00 my moms cooks and I eat that, too. You guys are trying to make it seem like being naturally skinny is impossible. It's really not. When I was twelve-thirteen, my mom took me to a anorexia rehab place and asked them to to see if I could gain weight. They gave me high calorie (3000+) for 6 weeks daily, and my weight went up my 2 pounds. I did exactly what I did at home.
(I had to make an account just to post this) I am tired of people targeting skinny ones. This thread is like saying there is no such things as naturally fat.
Well sweetie, there is no such thing as 'naturally fat'. People get fat because they eat more than they burn. What you say you eat does not sound out of line for a growing teenager.
Actually there are 'naturally fat' people born every day. Where do you think big babies come from? They don't over eat in the womb.
LOL. I don't think there has ever been a study of skinfold calipers on newborns. Obviously some babies are 'cooked' longer and have more fat than babies born early, as fat is accumulated during the last month in the womb. But it has nothing to do with how the baby ends up as an adult, or the baby's inherent metabolism.
Someone with a truly FAST metabolism that is not related to their LBM or their NEAT is a very rare bird indeed as has been established through resting metabolic testing.
Edited for clarity.0 -
The claims that there are not naturally thin or naturally fat people are just pseudo-scientific hogwash. Yes we can can all control our weight to a significant degree, but it's unfair to say that fat people only differ in having bad habits. Basal metabolic rate varies hugely among individuals for innate reasons other than lean body mass and it does not take much difference in BMR to significantly influence maintenance body weight. I don't know why people don't just go look things up, the data s not hard to find. Here is an example from Wikipedia describing a study of BMR variation that is pretty well known:
"The basal metabolic rate varies between individuals. One study of 150 adults representative of the population in Scotland reported basal metabolic rates from as low as 1027 kcal per day (4301 kJ/day) to as high as 2499 kcal/day (10455 kJ/day); with a mean BMR of 1500 kcal/day (6279 kJ/day). Statistically, the researchers calculated that 62.3% of this variation was explained by differences in fat free mass. Other factors explaining the variation included fat mass (6.7%), age (1.7%), and experimental error including within-subject difference (2%). The rest of the variation (26.7%) was unexplained. This remaining difference was not explained by sex nor by differing tissue sized of highly energetic organs such as the brain.[9]
Thus there are differences in BMR even when comparing two subjects with the same lean body mass. The top 5% of people are metabolizing energy 28-32% faster than individuals with the lowest 5% BMR.[10] For instance, one study reported an extreme case where two individuals with the same lean body mass of 43 kg had BMRs of 1075 kcal/day (4.5 MJ/day) and 1790 kcal/day (7.5 MJ/day). This difference of 715 kcal/day (67%) is equivalent to one of the individuals completing a 10 kilometer run every day.[10]"0 -
You really should do some wider reading before you make such claims. To start, read about FTO. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/FTOokay this is from my experience and not scientific or linked, just personal experience
I don't think very many are naturally thin, but I know 2 circumstances in my own family that are true. My wife and youngest son are naturally thin. My wife has gained some weight. She is 5'3 and 125 at 49. Most of her life she has been about 110. She always eats very large amounts of unhealthy foods for her size. She makes sweats. She eats tons of hamburgers, pizza, steak, Mexican food. She never eats fruits or vegetables. My youngest is the same as her. The youngest drinks a ton of whole milk and eats more than his peers. He is 12 and has a six pack. He is thin enough we had the doctors look him over concerned. They tested thyroid and a few other things and he is perfectly normal. Doctors wrote it off to genetics.
So think there is something genetically in some people that don't tell them to store fat like others even when they over eat
Wrong.
With all due respect, your doctor is an idiot and get another one.
There are no such things as "fat" genes or "skinny" genes.
ETA: the Agouti gene in mice; Prader-wili syndrome in humans, a paternally inherited syndrome where people affected usually have an insatiable appetite. While it's caused by a specific known mutation, how do we know that there aren't gene variations that cause more subtle effects?
Genetic variation absolutely influences metabolic processes. BMI alone has a heritability of around 50% (there was a recent very large study on this, but I can't remember the exact figure off hand).
Epigenetics also plays a role. Google and read the Dutch Hunger Winter studies and then tell me that genetics (Epigenetics in this case) doesn't count.0 -
The claims that there are not naturally thin or naturally fat people are just pseudo-scientific hogwash. Yes we can can all control our weight to a significant degree, but it's unfair to say that fat people only differ in having bad habits. Basal metabolic rate varies hugely among individuals for innate reasons other than lean body mass and it does not take much difference in BMR to significantly influence maintenance body weight. I don't know why people don't just go look things up, the data s not hard to find. Here is an example from Wikipedia describing a study of BMR variation that is pretty well known:
"The basal metabolic rate varies between individuals. One study of 150 adults representative of the population in Scotland reported basal metabolic rates from as low as 1027 kcal per day (4301 kJ/day) to as high as 2499 kcal/day (10455 kJ/day); with a mean BMR of 1500 kcal/day (6279 kJ/day). Statistically, the researchers calculated that 62.3% of this variation was explained by differences in fat free mass. Other factors explaining the variation included fat mass (6.7%), age (1.7%), and experimental error including within-subject difference (2%). The rest of the variation (26.7%) was unexplained. This remaining difference was not explained by sex nor by differing tissue sized of highly energetic organs such as the brain.[9]
Thus there are differences in BMR even when comparing two subjects with the same lean body mass. The top 5% of people are metabolizing energy 28-32% faster than individuals with the lowest 5% BMR.[10] For instance, one study reported an extreme case where two individuals with the same lean body mass of 43 kg had BMRs of 1075 kcal/day (4.5 MJ/day) and 1790 kcal/day (7.5 MJ/day). This difference of 715 kcal/day (67%) is equivalent to one of the individuals completing a 10 kilometer run every day.[10]"
Guess your post was completely ignored by the fella that claims "BMR is the same for everyone".
I'm one of those "naturally thin" folks. In my 20's I was about 30 lbs underweight and consuming probably 4K calories a day. I spent my time either seated at a desk, behind the wheel of a car, or parked on a chair... not fidgety or active or remotely athletic. It was nothing for me to eat half a bag of cookies and a couple of chocolate bars during the day for snacks... and huge meals... hell, I'd go to Pizza Hut and eat half a large pizza every second week. Often I'd have double dessert because I have a terrible sweet tooth.
Couldn't gain weight to save my life. It's genetic, my father is the same way.
I'm sure most people that saw me thought I was anorexic, I looked that skinny. Or thought I was a purger... a few confessed to watching me after meals, sure that I would sneak off to the bathroom to vomit.
Over the years I've managed to gain a few pounds but even at age 50 and menopausal, I'm still underweight. Only now I do exercise to maintain cardiovascular health and bone density (every one of my female ancestors had severe osteoporosis)... and I'm more careful with what I eat for my health, not my weight.0 -
hi
i guess i am a naturally thin person but i want to gain muscle weight and i want to be healthy, if you ask why i joined here.
I am about 101.5 pounds and i am 5'3" and a half.
Well it does come down to a mixture of food habits and genetics. but it doesnt mean overweight people cant become thin. My parents are both thin and it does play a part in my growth. naturally thin people are not very common.
(sorry if this is a bit irrelevent but i personally think its these tiny habits that make you lose weight)
Here are some other factors that i feel contribute with my low weight.
1. i get full easily, i rarely finish my plate. I kinda nibble into my food. im so lazy i don't eat (eating becomes a chore)
2. food is not fun for me. It is my fule. when im hungry i eat a bit. my content of my stomach is just small.
3. I play sport almost everyday
basketball twice a week.
sport 4 times a week , including cardio and strength.
saturday i have to walk long distances
my only break is sunday and wednesday in which i still walk alot on wednesday
(i play sport for lesuire rather than for maintaining my weight)
(but now im on vacation so yea im just enjoying myself)
4. When i was little i didn't have a large food supply due to my parents circumstances. (I didn't develop well)
5. i dont crave food. When i think of food it doesn't appatise me.
6. i am always sweaty and my metabolism is a little faster than the average person.
7. i have hobbies that side track me from food. (I feel that people on diets focus on food in their daily life and that may cause unwanted cravings :P)
8. i have this habit when my leg vibrates vigorously when im concentrating (i do this all the time, so does my father and uncles so this is kinda genetic)
9. i really like eating sour food (like lemons)
10. my culture food is healthy. (we eat mint, lemon, radishes in everything!)
11. my parents work and im too lazy to cook. so i just stay hungry,
12. There is a limited supply of junkfood at my place and ready made food.
13. i always have the fan on. ALWAYS. apparently if your a little too cold or hot your body has to work harder to stabalise your temp. But secretly i just put the fan on because my room is super dooper hot and im used to the noise. (and this is becausse im always warm (the fan doesn't work)
14. my internal organs dont absorb
15. oh and i forgot i sleep a lot. A LOT. atleast like 11 hours a day. (this is also because im lazy) sleeping more will make you lose more weight.
good luck everyone on your weight loss journey. 0 -
Mutants? Did you read anything I suggested? Do you know anything about genetics, epigenetics?
You really should do some wider reading before you make such claims. To start, read about FTO. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/FTOokay this is from my experience and not scientific or linked, just personal experience
I don't think very many are naturally thin, but I know 2 circumstances in my own family that are true. My wife and youngest son are naturally thin. My wife has gained some weight. She is 5'3 and 125 at 49. Most of her life she has been about 110. She always eats very large amounts of unhealthy foods for her size. She makes sweats. She eats tons of hamburgers, pizza, steak, Mexican food. She never eats fruits or vegetables. My youngest is the same as her. The youngest drinks a ton of whole milk and eats more than his peers. He is 12 and has a six pack. He is thin enough we had the doctors look him over concerned. They tested thyroid and a few other things and he is perfectly normal. Doctors wrote it off to genetics.
So think there is something genetically in some people that don't tell them to store fat like others even when they over eat
Wrong.
With all due respect, your doctor is an idiot and get another one.
There are no such things as "fat" genes or "skinny" genes.
ETA: the Agouti gene in mice; Prader-wili syndrome in humans, a paternally inherited syndrome where people affected usually have an insatiable appetite. While it's caused by a specific known mutation, how do we know that there aren't gene variations that cause more subtle effects?
Genetic variation absolutely influences metabolic processes. BMI alone has a heritability of around 50% (there was a recent very large study on this, but I can't remember the exact figure off hand).
Epigenetics also plays a role. Google and read the Dutch Hunger Winter studies and then tell me that genetics (Epigenetics in this case) doesn't count.
We are talking about genetically normal other-wise healthy people- not mutants.
And mice studies don't count.
Basic metabolism is the same for everyone. Even at rest, muscles make up 20-30 percent of of the basal metabolic rate, so those with a larger muscle mass will burn more calories.
The average 70 kg male will burn 65-70 Calories per hour at rest.
google metabolic rate and Guyton and do some reading.
I suspect not, because your response shows how uninformed you are. Your Guyton based education is just one little piece of a large puzzle regarding the human condition, and it's not up to date...textbooks never are. Similarly, basal metabolic rate is just one part of the puzzle regarding regulation of body weight. Studies have shown considerable individual variability with regard to adapting to both under and overfeeding (for example, partitioning between tissues), and as you're into textbooks, if you are interested, you can read about it in this one. Clinical Obesity in Adults and Children. http://www.amazon.com/Clinical-Obesity-Adults-Children-Kopelman/dp/1405182261
Open your mind. There's an amazing world out there.0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dU3GHvKubU
Yes there are naturally thin people. But don't lose heart, it's possible that even they can end up fat or hungry like the rest of us through mysterious and nefarious influences that could involve anything from stress to pollutants to viruses. If misery loves company, just wait around, your skinny pals who eat whatever they want might end up right there at the cupcake trough eventually.
0 -
I was naturally thin until my 30s. I was very active and to this day I'm not overweight. But, I travel a lot for work so I log. Hubby is not overweight ether. We just stay active even in winter (see profile pic) we also love to cook and try to eat as local and organic as possible. I mean, even the fish is caught the same day around here. #Boston0
-
P.S. Obese people do have skinny friends. That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard.........................................................
P.P.S. Merry Christmas to those who celebrate0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dU3GHvKubU
Yes there are naturally thin people. But don't lose heart, it's possible that even they can end up fat or hungry like the rest of us through mysterious and nefarious influences that could involve anything from stress to pollutants to viruses. If misery loves company, just wait around, your skinny pals who eat whatever they want might end up right there at the cupcake trough eventually.
The problem is that most obese people don't have skinny friends.
Sorry. Bad joke.
But if you are obese and ready to get serious about weight loss, track down one of those amazing genetically gifted NATURALLY skinny people who also don't exercise much and invite them out for coffee (NOT lunch).
Then ask then detailed questions about their eating habits. How much, how often, what they like to eat. How they feel about food.
You'll be surprised.
I'm not overweight anymore, but it is a struggle to maintain. I was creeping back up into the high end of my normal range the past two months because of how hard it is for me. I got a nasty rash on my back, horrible mood swings, and the worst cold ever, too. Guess it serves me right for forgetting that a little bit of junk food turns quickly into the entire baked goods section of the grocery store.
If I eat like a skinny person who doesn't crave, here is what happens: I'll share a carb filled, sensible meal with Miss Skinny Minny. Maybe we'll split dessert. 500 calories each, total. Wonderful. Neither of us will gain weight that way if we eat three meals a day. Worst that will happen is we'll maintain.
But then I'll go home and crave junk-food for the rest of the day. Skinny Minny, meanwhile, will watch some TV, maybe have a glass of wine, do some yoga, do whatever, and go to sleep, blissfully free of any desire to polish off an entire quart of ice cream.
That and only that is the difference. But it's huge!
And low carb, while it helps, still doesn't entirely get rid of the cravings. It's hard work to stay thin when part of your brain thinks a serving size of cookies should be the family sized bag.0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dU3GHvKubU
Yes there are naturally thin people. But don't lose heart, it's possible that even they can end up fat or hungry like the rest of us through mysterious and nefarious influences that could involve anything from stress to pollutants to viruses. If misery loves company, just wait around, your skinny pals who eat whatever they want might end up right there at the cupcake trough eventually.
The problem is that most obese people don't have skinny friends.
Sorry. Bad joke.
But if you are obese and ready to get serious about weight loss, track down one of those amazing genetically gifted NATURALLY skinny people who also don't exercise much and invite them out for coffee (NOT lunch).
Then ask then detailed questions about their eating habits. How much, how often, what they like to eat. How they feel about food.
You'll be surprised.
I'm not overweight anymore, but it is a struggle to maintain. I was creeping back up into the high end of my normal range the past two months because of how hard it is for me. I got a nasty rash on my back, horrible mood swings, and the worst cold ever, too. Guess it serves me right for forgetting that a little bit of junk food turns quickly into the entire baked goods section of the grocery store.
If I eat like a skinny person who doesn't crave, here is what happens: I'll share a carb filled, sensible meal with Miss Skinny Minny. Maybe we'll split dessert. 500 calories each, total. Wonderful. Neither of us will gain weight that way if we eat three meals a day. Worst that will happen is we'll maintain.
But then I'll go home and crave junk-food for the rest of the day. Skinny Minny, meanwhile, will watch some TV, maybe have a glass of wine, do some yoga, do whatever, and go to sleep, blissfully free of any desire to polish off an entire quart of ice cream.
That and only that is the difference. But it's huge!
And low carb, while it helps, still doesn't entirely get rid of the cravings. It's hard work to stay thin when part of your brain thinks a serving size of cookies should be the family sized bag.
You can control your cravings, believe it or not.
Your skinny friend has.
You have not.
One way is to get used to being a little bit hungry. The best way is to skip breakfast on a routine basis and live your morning life- whatever it is, raising kids, working, whatever-with your stomach not full of food.
The stomach does change over time with this protocol, and the brain does re-wire.
And you can attain that happy state.
It is the only way to permanent weight loss, but people don't believe it. Scientists who should be studying this don't, because no one makes any money if you miss a meal.
Read some of my other posts on the subject. There are actually two LOCKED threads on the subject of skipping breakfast, which shows you the prevailing attitude on something- dealing with hunger- that the NATURALLY think people have conquered long ago.
Oh Steve! Where have you been???0 -
The stomach does change over time with this protocol, and the brain does re-wire.
And you can attain that happy state.
It is the only way to permanent weight loss, but people don't believe it. Scientists who should be studying this don't, because no one makes any money if you miss a meal.
Ah, Steve. Finally admits there is no scientific basis for what he claims to be true.
Snake oil salesman.0 -
The stomach does change over time with this protocol, and the brain does re-wire.
And you can attain that happy state.
It is the only way to permanent weight loss, but people don't believe it. Scientists who should be studying this don't, because no one makes any money if you miss a meal.
Ah, Steve. Finally admits there is no scientific basis for what he claims to be true.
Snake oil salesman.
:drinker: 0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dU3GHvKubU
Yes there are naturally thin people. But don't lose heart, it's possible that even they can end up fat or hungry like the rest of us through mysterious and nefarious influences that could involve anything from stress to pollutants to viruses. If misery loves company, just wait around, your skinny pals who eat whatever they want might end up right there at the cupcake trough eventually.
The problem is that most obese people don't have skinny friends.
Sorry. Bad joke.
But if you are obese and ready to get serious about weight loss, track down one of those amazing genetically gifted NATURALLY skinny people who also don't exercise much and invite them out for coffee (NOT lunch).
Then ask then detailed questions about their eating habits. How much, how often, what they like to eat. How they feel about food.
You'll be surprised.
I'm not overweight anymore, but it is a struggle to maintain. I was creeping back up into the high end of my normal range the past two months because of how hard it is for me. I got a nasty rash on my back, horrible mood swings, and the worst cold ever, too. Guess it serves me right for forgetting that a little bit of junk food turns quickly into the entire baked goods section of the grocery store.
If I eat like a skinny person who doesn't crave, here is what happens: I'll share a carb filled, sensible meal with Miss Skinny Minny. Maybe we'll split dessert. 500 calories each, total. Wonderful. Neither of us will gain weight that way if we eat three meals a day. Worst that will happen is we'll maintain.
But then I'll go home and crave junk-food for the rest of the day. Skinny Minny, meanwhile, will watch some TV, maybe have a glass of wine, do some yoga, do whatever, and go to sleep, blissfully free of any desire to polish off an entire quart of ice cream.
That and only that is the difference. But it's huge!
And low carb, while it helps, still doesn't entirely get rid of the cravings. It's hard work to stay thin when part of your brain thinks a serving size of cookies should be the family sized bag.
You can control your cravings, believe it or not.
Your skinny friend has.
You have not.
One way is to get used to being a little bit hungry. The best way is to skip breakfast on a routine basis and live your morning life- whatever it is, raising kids, working, whatever-with your stomach not full of food.
The stomach does change over time with this protocol, and the brain does re-wire.
And you can attain that happy state.
It is the only way to permanent weight loss, but people don't believe it. Scientists who should be studying this don't, because no one makes any money if you miss a meal.
Read some of my other posts on the subject. There are actually two LOCKED threads on the subject of skipping breakfast, which shows you the prevailing attitude on something- dealing with hunger- that the NATURALLY think people have conquered long ago.
Sure I can control my cravings. It will be about as much fun as someone who was a pack a day smoker trying to stop at one cigarette a day, though.
No thanks! Makes me way too grumpy!0 -
You really should do some wider reading before you make such claims. To start, read about FTO. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/FTOokay this is from my experience and not scientific or linked, just personal experience
I don't think very many are naturally thin, but I know 2 circumstances in my own family that are true. My wife and youngest son are naturally thin. My wife has gained some weight. She is 5'3 and 125 at 49. Most of her life she has been about 110. She always eats very large amounts of unhealthy foods for her size. She makes sweats. She eats tons of hamburgers, pizza, steak, Mexican food. She never eats fruits or vegetables. My youngest is the same as her. The youngest drinks a ton of whole milk and eats more than his peers. He is 12 and has a six pack. He is thin enough we had the doctors look him over concerned. They tested thyroid and a few other things and he is perfectly normal. Doctors wrote it off to genetics.
So think there is something genetically in some people that don't tell them to store fat like others even when they over eat
Wrong.
With all due respect, your doctor is an idiot and get another one.
There are no such things as "fat" genes or "skinny" genes.
ETA: the Agouti gene in mice; Prader-wili syndrome in humans, a paternally inherited syndrome where people affected usually have an insatiable appetite. While it's caused by a specific known mutation, how do we know that there aren't gene variations that cause more subtle effects?
Genetic variation absolutely influences metabolic processes. BMI alone has a heritability of around 50% (there was a recent very large study on this, but I can't remember the exact figure off hand).
Epigenetics also plays a role. Google and read the Dutch Hunger Winter studies and then tell me that genetics (Epigenetics in this case) doesn't count.
Nice reply. 0 -
You really should do some wider reading before you make such claims. To start, read about FTO. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/FTOokay this is from my experience and not scientific or linked, just personal experience
I don't think very many are naturally thin, but I know 2 circumstances in my own family that are true. My wife and youngest son are naturally thin. My wife has gained some weight. She is 5'3 and 125 at 49. Most of her life she has been about 110. She always eats very large amounts of unhealthy foods for her size. She makes sweats. She eats tons of hamburgers, pizza, steak, Mexican food. She never eats fruits or vegetables. My youngest is the same as her. The youngest drinks a ton of whole milk and eats more than his peers. He is 12 and has a six pack. He is thin enough we had the doctors look him over concerned. They tested thyroid and a few other things and he is perfectly normal. Doctors wrote it off to genetics.
So think there is something genetically in some people that don't tell them to store fat like others even when they over eat
Wrong.
With all due respect, your doctor is an idiot and get another one.
There are no such things as "fat" genes or "skinny" genes.
ETA: the Agouti gene in mice; Prader-wili syndrome in humans, a paternally inherited syndrome where people affected usually have an insatiable appetite. While it's caused by a specific known mutation, how do we know that there aren't gene variations that cause more subtle effects?
Genetic variation absolutely influences metabolic processes. BMI alone has a heritability of around 50% (there was a recent very large study on this, but I can't remember the exact figure off hand).
Epigenetics also plays a role. Google and read the Dutch Hunger Winter studies and then tell me that genetics (Epigenetics in this case) doesn't count.
Nice reply.
Really? While there are undoubtedly a range of metabolic rates for humans (how broad is unknown and may or may not be significant), and of course genetics plays a role in that, I don't find these examples to be good ones.
FTO is 'associated' with fat mass. Which doesn't say diddly, really, other than it seems to be correlated. I assume we all know the correlation != causation mantra. Keep it in the forefront of your mind when looking at genetic data - most 'correlated' genes end up being discarded as causative factors when geneticists really try to nail them down. FTO is a DNA and RNA repair enzyme. At best, it'd be several steps removed from the metabolic processes involved in fat mass regulation.
Prader-wili causes unending hunger. Not a change in metabolism, as far as I know.
Heritability of BMI better have been done with separated twin studies or some such if they hope to control for learned behavior. If the recent study was large, then it likely didn't include those types of controls. It's too difficult to find large numbers of people who meet the necessary parameters and are willing to participate in a study.
The role of epigenetics is yet to be seen. I'm sure it'll play a role somewhere, but again, to what extent is unknown.
To me, the big question is, how far can one vary from the 'average' metabolically speaking and still be an apparently 'normal' human? Changing any aspect of metabolism has far-reaching effects beyond just changing how many calories you need to perform X function. It would potentially affect your immune system, growth, development, reproduction, nerve conduction, organ and muscle performance, on and on. My completely wild guess is that the viability range for an overall metabolic rate is fairly narrow. But who knows.0 -
in_the_stars- The above questions were for you.
Also, why does your profile say you're 77? And where was your broken clavicle a week ago when you posted a flexed bicep selfie? You're looking pretty healthy for 99 lbs. at 5'2".But this the "General Diet and Weight Loss Help" forum within the MFP forums. I'm not implying anyone needs to be overweight to read and post here. I was just curious. I have no interest in the weight gain forums because I don't have that specific problem so it would be odd for me to be reading/posting there. To me.
See all the swelling? Shoulder and clavicle fracture. The darker spots on neck, upper chest and arm are remaining bruises from the car accident. Between my seatbelt wrapped around my neck and steering wheel, I'm lucky it wasn't worse. Happy now?
0 -
Yes, there are. I dated a guy from NZ who ate a TON and was skinny as a rail. Couldn't pack on fat or muscle as hard as he tried (and believe me, he tried all kinds of things). He was just one of the "lucky" ones. In a way, it was its own curse. Poor guy was a tall beanpole and couldn't bulk up in any direction. He hated it.0
-
You really should do some wider reading before you make such claims. To start, read about FTO. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/FTOokay this is from my experience and not scientific or linked, just personal experience
I don't think very many are naturally thin, but I know 2 circumstances in my own family that are true. My wife and youngest son are naturally thin. My wife has gained some weight. She is 5'3 and 125 at 49. Most of her life she has been about 110. She always eats very large amounts of unhealthy foods for her size. She makes sweats. She eats tons of hamburgers, pizza, steak, Mexican food. She never eats fruits or vegetables. My youngest is the same as her. The youngest drinks a ton of whole milk and eats more than his peers. He is 12 and has a six pack. He is thin enough we had the doctors look him over concerned. They tested thyroid and a few other things and he is perfectly normal. Doctors wrote it off to genetics.
So think there is something genetically in some people that don't tell them to store fat like others even when they over eat
Wrong.
With all due respect, your doctor is an idiot and get another one.
There are no such things as "fat" genes or "skinny" genes.
ETA: the Agouti gene in mice; Prader-wili syndrome in humans, a paternally inherited syndrome where people affected usually have an insatiable appetite. While it's caused by a specific known mutation, how do we know that there aren't gene variations that cause more subtle effects?
Genetic variation absolutely influences metabolic processes. BMI alone has a heritability of around 50% (there was a recent very large study on this, but I can't remember the exact figure off hand).
Epigenetics also plays a role. Google and read the Dutch Hunger Winter studies and then tell me that genetics (Epigenetics in this case) doesn't count.
Nice reply.
Really? While there are undoubtedly a range of metabolic rates for humans (how broad is unknown and may or may not be significant), and of course genetics plays a role in that, I don't find these examples to be good ones.
FTO is 'associated' with fat mass. Which doesn't say diddly, really, other than it seems to be correlated. I assume we all know the correlation != causation mantra. Keep it in the forefront of your mind when looking at genetic data - most 'correlated' genes end up being discarded as causative factors when geneticists really try to nail them down. FTO is a DNA and RNA repair enzyme. At best, it'd be several steps removed from the metabolic processes involved in fat mass regulation.
Prader-wili causes unending hunger. Not a change in metabolism, as far as I know.
Heritability of BMI better have been done with separated twin studies or some such if they hope to control for learned behavior. If the recent study was large, then it likely didn't include those types of controls. It's too difficult to find large numbers of people who meet the necessary parameters and are willing to participate in a study.
The role of epigenetics is yet to be seen. I'm sure it'll play a role somewhere, but again, to what extent is unknown.
To me, the big question is, how far can one vary from the 'average' metabolically speaking and still be an apparently 'normal' human? Changing any aspect of metabolism has far-reaching effects beyond just changing how many calories you need to perform X function. It would potentially affect your immune system, growth, development, reproduction, nerve conduction, organ and muscle performance, on and on. My completely wild guess is that the viability range for an overall metabolic rate is fairly narrow. But who knows.
Spot on.
And as our basic metabolism evolved over 600-1,000 MILLION years, any baseline variability probably increases survivability in some fashion. That likely accounts for our thyroid hormone function.
Being hugely obese has few survivability positives that I can see- though that point can be argued by those especially motivated.
Oh Stevie!
Where were you when we needed you in the threads earlier? There was a guy who was ADAMANT about NEVER skipping breakfast!0 -
Oh sigh.
Easy one. CYP2D6 gene?
Quantity AND quality. How many times that gene occurs in your genome?0 -
I used to be able to eat large amounts and not gain weight, but that was when I was a teenager and my thyroid was out of whack. When my thyroid straightened out and I got a little older, I started packing on the pounds very quickly! It took me years to unlearn the bad eating habits I gained from years of being able to eat whatever I wanted.
Now, I count calories carefully and lift weights regularly. Sometimes at work, people see me eating a large quantity of cookies or a big, huge slice of cake and they think I eat that way all the time and am "naturally thin." They don't see me at the gym later that night working off those cookies or cake. Then the next day I go back to my usual 1250-1300 calorie/day diet.0 -
A textbook (Guyton and Hall) is the go-to source for all information that has been proved and accepted by ALL medical experts and researchers throughout the WORLD.
It is not just ONE piece.
It is the MAJOR piece. It is the gold standard.
Lay-people who are just trying to lose weight should not go farther than Guyton's, or any similar medical textbook, for their understanding of physiology and how their bodies work.
All these other theories have to be vetted, and then they WILL become a part of Guyton's and mainstream accepted medicine IF they pass muster.
The vast majority fall by the wayside because they are WRONG.
Hmmm, yet you weren’t interested in the information I posted from another textbook about variability in response to under and overeating showing that it’s not just about metabolic rate, which you continue to claim. It was from a textbook, so according to your assertions, proven and accepted by researchers around the world.
It’s not just about metabolism though. My understanding about this thread is that it’s about some people finding weight regulation easier than others. There are many factors involved in weight regulation and to say it’s only about metabolic rate is extremely short-sighted.Dr. Oz and other TV "professionals" like him should be ashamed of some of the positive spin they put on nonsensical approaches to weight loss they parade out on their shows.
Basic metabolism within humans only varies as the levels of muscle mass changes, and the level of thyroid hormones change over time. The effect these changes have on net calorie balance is small compared the effect of burning calories through exercise or not ingesting calories at all by ACTUALLY SKIPPING A MEAL.
I don’t agree with Dr Oz’s rubbish either, but your simplistic view is just as extreme as Dr Oz’s woo approach.
Who did this? Are you talking about the Agouti gene in mice, which I gave as an extreme example of the impact of genes on obesity phenotype. It’s a typical textbook example of epigenetics and foetal programming which also likely happens in humans….again, read about the Dutch Hunger Winter studies.Putting Guyton's on an equal level with some rat study with a likely flawed design is totally disingenuous.
Anyway, I see now that you’re the ‘no breakfast’ dude so, no doubt, I’m wasting my time here. You’re too fixated on your own agenda.0 -
Really? While there are undoubtedly a range of metabolic rates for humans (how broad is unknown and may or may not be significant), and of course genetics plays a role in that, I don't find these examples to be good ones.
FTO is 'associated' with fat mass. Which doesn't say diddly, really, other than it seems to be correlated. I assume we all know the correlation != causation mantra. Keep it in the forefront of your mind when looking at genetic data - most 'correlated' genes end up being discarded as causative factors when geneticists really try to nail them down. FTO is a DNA and RNA repair enzyme. At best, it'd be several steps removed from the metabolic processes involved in fat mass regulation.
FTO is an RNA demethylase, so it’s likely involved in RNA interference. It’s been shown to alter ghrelin response, which would impact eating behaviour. So in this instance correlation = causation!
Yes, but ability to maintain weight is not just about metabolism.Prader-wili causes unending hunger. Not a change in metabolism, as far as I know.
This study looked at over 20,000 sibs.Heritability of BMI better have been done with separated twin studies or some such if they hope to control for learned behavior. If the recent study was large, then it likely didn't include those types of controls. It's too difficult to find large numbers of people who meet the necessary parameters and are willing to participate in a study.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24183453
Yes, there are different methods of analysing heritability but the impact of living conditions are most certainly controlled for.
Yes, it’s early days but there is already some pretty compelling evidence.The role of epigenetics is yet to be seen. I'm sure it'll play a role somewhere, but again, to what extent is unknown.To me, the big question is, how far can one vary from the 'average' metabolically speaking and still be an apparently 'normal' human? Changing any aspect of metabolism has far-reaching effects beyond just changing how many calories you need to perform X function. It would potentially affect your immune system, growth, development, reproduction, nerve conduction, organ and muscle performance, on and on. My completely wild guess is that the viability range for an overall metabolic rate is fairly narrow. But who knows.
In my opinion, control of weight is much more complex and metabolism is just one aspect of it.0 -
. How many times that gene occurs in your genome?
None. Mine's named Jake.
0 -
Another good lecture for those of us who really can't eat just one:
Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLGoT5gDA0E
Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZyGj4eVe8U 0 -
Until all these studies make it into Guyton or some other mainstream physiology textbook as verified concepts, I'm not going to waste time on it.
But you see Steve, this is what makes you unable to have a debate. Because you are going on 2010 material and it is 2013. Plus, who's to say everything important got into Guytons?
*headesk*0 -
My husband is 5'10" and 155 lbs, 51 years old, and he eats an ungodly number of calories in sugar with candy, cookies, and soft drinks! He has always done this and has always stayed at 155 lb. He also has a desk job, so is fairly sedentary. So I think he may be an outlier, lol!0
-
Until all these studies make it into Guyton or some other mainstream physiology textbook as verified concepts, I'm not going to waste time on it.
But you see Steve, this is what makes you unable to have a debate. Because you are going on 2010 material and it is 2013. Plus, who's to say everything important got into Guytons?
*headesk*
Guyton's latest publication date is 2011.
Admittedly, it probably reflects stuff that is a couple years older than that.
But I do not understand how the breakfast works.
Fixed it for you
I U, Steve! 0 -
This is an interesting topic! I was never a naturally thin person. I put on weight from puberty and never lost, not until this year (15 years post puberty).
Which means that I haven't been this weight since I was 12. Hm. Sounds sick when I put it that way.
Not at all. As soon as puberty hit, I was 135. At 13!
All the rest of my family has never weighed more than this. I've seen what they eat. And I know their lifestyle. Their metabolic rate has to be higher, that's for sure. I must get the other family gene's :-P I'm currently 157. Not too much longer and I'll be back at what I was at the beginning of puberty. That IS insane when you really do think about it...0 -
When I married my husband he was 6' and weighed 138 lbs, Yes you read that right. That man was skinny. He had a metabolism as they say. Well actually he didn't, his family are all thin as well. Here is what I observed:
My mother-in-law made a pound of pasta for 5, and it was more than enough. My mother made a pound of pasta for 4 as a side dish and we ate it all.
My Sister-in-law walked in the house starving, ate 1/2 a sausage and she was full. Me I would have eaten 3 sausages.
My husband would be hungry, not find food he liked to eat and just wouldn't eat. When I am hungry, there is always something that I will eat.
My mother-in-law made a pan of Lasagna and each person ate one square. My house, a pan of Lasagna fed 3 people.
My husband's home, food was not the center of everything. Food was important, but not the center. My house, food was the center of all social gatherings.
My husband was a smoker at that time and he always had Acid Reflux. He found out his stomach produces too much acid, which is what I think contributed to what we thought was a high metabolism. Before he controled the acid he had a very high tolerance to medication, alcohol, etc. Basically if a drug was take every 6 hours, it completely wore off in 4 for him. He also quick smoking. Between both those things he gained about 50 lbs. He also go older and less active.
So based on what I saw, thinner people naturally eat less food, even if it is high calorie. My MIL cooked steak in oil, husband ate 1/2. I cooked same steak, no added oil, he ate the whole steak. My husband does not ENJOY food the same way I do. He likes food, but he could live without it, he eats to live. I eat sometimes cause well its Pizza.
Thin people eat when they are hungry and stop eating when full, they also don't do comfort eating. When stressed they don't eat. It is the opposite for someone like me, I comfort eat, I eat when stressed, I eat when bored, etc. Not true for thin people.
FYI, my daughter is also thin. I have seen her eat 1200 calories in one sitting at age 5 and the next day eat only 120 calories for the day.
THAT was an interesting read :-)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K 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
- 421 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
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions