We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Overweight attributed to genetics???
Lift_hard_eat_big
Posts: 2,278 Member
If it's commonly accepted to attribute athleticism and good looks to genetics, is it possible that being overweight is attributed to genetics? Of course through exercise and caloric intake, one can perhaps fight their genetics. But why is it that so many people who bust their *kitten* in the gym, and eat so few calories, still have a difficult time losing weight?
0
Replies
-
There are genetic conditions and physiological disorders, particularly with the endocrine system that do promote fat storage and weight gain.0
-
They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.0 -
If it's commonly accepted to attribute athleticism and good looks to genetics, is it possible that being overweight is attributed to genetics? Of course through exercise and caloric intake, one can perhaps fight their genetics. But why is it that so many people who bust their *kitten* in the gym, and eat so few calories, still have a difficult time losing weight?
Too few calories? The wrong calories? Not being honest about the calories?
Too much 'busting *kitten*' (raising cortisol) and not enough eating right?
Genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger ...0 -
They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.
I under stand your three points. On paper it seems so simple. I know some people like about what they eat and how much they train. But how is it that there are those that eat garbage and tons of calories, more than they burn in a day and manage to stay slender. And then there are those, who should be slender because they train like beast, eat right, yet are still overweight.0 -
Genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger ...
Probably the truest statement yet about the diversity and difficulty of fitness attainment or weightloss.0 -
They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.
I suppose how fat you can get is genetic / childhood. Ive seen a few studies that back that up, Not sure how true it is but ive seen it written that being a fat child creates more fat cells making your body better at storing exces calories.
But really thr its genetic thing is an excuse, Anyone can loose weight it just takes a change forever.0 -
Genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger ...
THIS. I truly believe that I (and some people in my family) naturally have a slow metabolism. I have several obese people in my family, part is genetics and part is how they eat. Because it is harder for them to lose weight, they give up and say, "I guess I'm supposed to be fat!" and then proceed to eat whatever they want and let themselves go.
It sucks and is unfair, but people, like myself, have to work even harder to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.0 -
But really thr its genetic thing is an excuse, Anyone can loose weight it just takes a change forever.
Theres truth to this, some of the physiological disorders case a slow down in total metabolism, or it could be certain foods cause an inflammatory response. Would need to change the intake to keep it matched to the outtake0 -
To answer your question in one word. yes. Genetics play a large role in a persons physical make up. It's not as simple as just eye and hair color. There can and often is a genetic predisposition to disease, mental illness, obesity and many other things. The human body is an amazing machine capable of things we still have no comprehension of.0
-
It sucks and is unfair, but people, like myself, have to work even harder to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.
You are genetically gifted, you more efficient processing food to energy, in a survival situation you would technically be able to maintain on less
0 -
My mum is very slim, always has been, she is 89 now and still active and healthy for her age.
My dad was obese, gained weight easily and died of a heart attack in his late 60's
They were both very active
They both ate the same foods give or take.
My brother is slim always has been eats what he likes never gains weight
I am large, gain weight easily and have to fight to get it off
Does this mean I a have my fathers genetic makeup as far as weight gain is concerned and that I am predisposed to gain weight easily? I think it probably does but that doesn't mean I am doomed to be fat and have a heart attack in my late 60's I have the choice of using the tools I have to make sure my body is as fit and healthy as possible. It just means I have to work harder than my brother to keep my weight down.
The other option is just throwing up my hands and blaming my dads genes for making me fat and looking forward to my heart attack I guess.:ohwell:0 -
I do think it's part genetics, and it's something you have to fight.
Both sides of both of my family have always been in the range of overweight, obese, even morbidly obese.
And that's why I'm pretty obsessed with the gym.0 -
I feel like the gun is a machine gun that must have the trigger constantly pulled or else you cease fire--at some point MOST people tire of pulling the trigger or just CAN'T for one reason or another. It's rather logical that 95% of people fail --Any minor distraction and the lifestyle that's required to continually win the fight against your genetics is compromised. when you abandon that lifestyle you're predisposed to gaining the weight back. I believe you have a small window that you can control with relative ease and beyond that you must be hyper vigilant to prevent weight regain.0
-
Must be nice to have all the answers at the ripe old age of 21. When I was 21 I may even have agreed with you. Then I grew up and discovered first hand that there are outside influences that can greatly affect weight gain including drugs (prescription and illegal), age, pregnancy, etc. I gained 50 lbs when my first son was born and I went on the Depo shot. I ate the same as I did before I was pregnant. If anything I ate less as I completely lost my sweet tooth. I exercised even more than I did before I was pregnant. But I gained 50 lbs in less than 6 months. When I was 21 I was one of those people who could say "I think I'm going to try to lose a few pounds." and I'd lose 5 lbs just from declaring that I was going to lose weight. When I was 27 and a new mom I'd gain 5 pounds just by smelling a cookie. My body never fully recovered. I don't know if the Depo screwed something up or what but never again was it easy to lose weight and I ended up learning the hard way that your simple answer is not that simple.They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.0 -
I blamed mine on genetics, then when I got lean the first time, I realized my genetics actually kick *kitten* (I'm an absolute mesomorph).
If I had been eating better, my genetics are actually to carry a bunch of muscle and gain it easily.0 -
Possibly.
Genes Point to Best Diets
Gene Test Indicates Who Will Benefit From Low-Carb or Low-Fat Diets
By RON WINSLOW
SAN FRANCISCO—In the long-running debate over diets—low-fat or low-carb—Stanford University researchers reported Wednesday that a genetic test can help people choose which one works best for them.
In a study involving 133 overweight women, those with a genetic predisposition to benefit from a low-carbohydrate diet lost 2 1/2 times as much weight as those on the same diet without the predisposition. Similarly, women with a genetic makeup that favored a low-fat diet lost substantially more weight than women who curbed fat calories without low-fat genes. The women were followed for a year.
"Knowing your genotype for low-carb or low-fat diets could help you increase your weight-loss success," said Christopher Gardner, an associate professor of medicine at Stanford and a co-author of the study.
Data from a separate study indicate that 45% of white women have a low-carb genotype while 39% are predisposed to a low-fat diet, suggesting the test has the potential to yield a useful result for much of the population. The test is based on variations in three genes known to regulate how the body metabolizes fat and carbohydrates.
The findings need confirmation in a larger study, and additional research is also necessary to more clearly determine the usefulness of the test, including how it applies to men and different racial groups.
The results help explain a common phenomenon in the weight-loss wars: why two people decide to lose weight and go on the same diet and exercise plan, only to have one succeed while the other is frustrated.
The results suggest even strict adherence to a diet won't matter if people's diets are out of synch with their genetics, he added.
The test was developed by Interleukin Genetics Inc., a Waltham, Mass., developer of genetic tests that sponsored the study. The test uses a cheek swab to obtain cells for DNA analysis, and is on the market for $149.
In the past decade, about a dozen studies pitting low-fat vs. low-carb diets have been published in major medical journals. For the most part, no winner has emerged, and none of the diets resulted, on average, in weight loss exceeding 10 pounds in a year. Experts began to believe the type of diet didn't matter.
"This makes the whole topic relevant again," Dr. Gardner said.
Researchers said that determining a person's genetic predisposition could become a new tool in the battle against overweight and obesity.
"This is one step forward to realizing personalized nutrition for weight loss," said Mindy Dopler Nelson, a researcher at Stanford and lead author of the report. The researchers said they didn't have any financial interest in the Interleukin Genetics test.
"To match individuals with a diet type will help us to better target interventions and help them be successful," added Sachiko St. Jeor, a professor in the division of endocrinology, nutrition and metabolism at University of Nevada School of Medicine, Reno. Dr. St. Jeor wasn't involved with the study.
The study, presented at the American Heart Association's annual epidemiology and prevention conference, has just been submitted to a medical journal and thus hasn't yet cleared rigorous peer review that precedes publication. But it was reviewed by a committee that approves papers for presentation at the meeting.
Despite the relatively small number of participants, the findings achieved strong statistical significance, researchers said, meaning it isn't likely they were the result of chance. The findings are also based in part on an earlier paper, called the A to Z weight-loss study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2007.
Just matching the right diet with your genes doesn't guarantee significant weight loss for everyone, Dr. Gardner cautioned. If low-carb people make a diet out of low-carb cupcakes, he said, they're unlikely to see the results they want on a scale.
"It's not the end of the obesity epidemic," Dr. Gardner said. "But we need every leg-up we can get."
The 133 women were among 301 participants in the A to Z study, which compared the effects of four popular weight-loss diets: the Atkins and Zone diets, which are low-carb, and the Learn and Ornish diets, which call for curbing fat calories.
In that study, the Atkins diet was slightly more effective than the other three, but on average, the total weight loss after one year was only about 10 pounds.
Yet, Dr. Nelson pointed out, within each diet group, a handful of women lost more than 30 pounds, while some others gained about 10 pounds. The new study examined whether genetics could explain part of the more than 40-pound swing.
Kenneth S. Kornman, president and chief scientific officer at Interleukin, said the company asked if the Stanford team could use its genetic test on the A to Z participants to see if their genetic makeup predicted their weight-loss experience.
Since Stanford researchers hadn't obtained any DNA samples in the study, Dr. Nelson led an effort to track down the original participants. She said over 130 agreed to submit cheek swab samples to determine their genetic predisposition. The researchers re-analyzed the study based on the genetic results.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703862704575099742545274032.html0 -
Forgot to put this in the first post. Summary of the scientific evidence - http://www.inherenthealth.com/media/4759/wm_scientific summary.pdf0
-
Rainhoward hit the nail on the head...however genetics only plays the role that you give it the strength to play. If you take care to eat well and move daily, genetics are a much smaller part of your makeup. There always has to be a trigger for the genes to turn on!! I am now proudly the smallest female in my family...:drinker:To answer your question in one word. yes. Genetics play a large role in a persons physical make up. It's not as simple as just eye and hair color. There can and often is a genetic predisposition to disease, mental illness, obesity and many other things. The human body is an amazing machine capable of things we still have no comprehension of.0 -
At Kahn's request, a colleague in Germany, Matthais Blüher of the University of Leipzig, looked at 10 of the same genes in samples of visceral and subcutaneous fat he had taken from humans (a third of the subjects were lean, a third overweight, and a third obese). He found up to 1,000-fold differences in the levels of gene expression. "Some genes were turned way on in subcutaneous fat," Kahn reports, "and others were turned way on in visceral fat." Three of the genes seemed to be related to overall obesity. When the scientists looked at the level of the genes' expression, they could correctly identify the body mass of the person the fat came from. "It is pretty clear," Kahn sums up, "that both obesity and body shape are to a large extent genetically programmed."
James Kirkland of Boston University Medical Center would agree. From his own work, he concludes that fat distribution has an even stronger genetic basis than obesity, with the former 70 percent attributable to hereditary factors compared with 40 to 50 percent for the latter. When Kirkland took progenitor fat cells from human fats—subcutaneous, omental, and mesenteric—and cultured them, they retained their distinctive characteristics even after 40 population doublings. "They seemed to retain a memory of the fat depot they came from," he says.
from here - http://discovermagazine.com/2007/feb/visceral-fat/article_view?b_start:int=2&-C=0 -
Exactly.Genetics loads the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger ...0 -
Somewhat. I've been eating on average 2500 calories (net) for quite a while and still never gain much. I've been between 97 and 104 pounds my whole life, never dieted..and I'm now quite sedentary. I do have family that eat less than me and weigh a lot more.
Who knows?
Methyl markers aren't the only way genes are turned on or off. Promoters and repressors that regulate how much a gene expresses itself into mRNA? and then translating into a protein?
Bodies have changing needs. 0 -
I'm definitely fighting genetics as people in my family line are mostly 200+ some even 300+. Most of us are tall too, like I'm 5'8".
I'm 185lbs and see where a LOT of the weight of the weight will come off but I'm doomed with wide hips. I doubt I could get smaller than a size 6/8 or 140lbs. But, that is my goal, to get to that point at least. Once when I was 135lbs I looked absolutely anorexic. Maybe I will look not so frail and thin if I add muscle but get down to 135lbs? I dont know, for now...I'm working to 140lbs.
Genetics may play a role but it's not the end all, be all.0 -
Genetics are a huge contributing factor to weight and can make weight loss or gain very difficult. While we can all overcome the hand genetics dealt us, let's be honest some people will never be a size 2 and some people will never be a size 22, despite their best efforts to the contrary. That is why I don't understand why so many MFP members (not referring to anyone in this post) feel the need to insist on one size fits all methods to weight loss, when we are individuals and what works for you may not do anything for me. My father is in his sixties and can eat and drink what he wants and does not gain a pound. He is now and has always been a very thin man. My mother was thin when she was in her twenties but hasn't been smaller than a 14 since and at one point was a size 20. She absolutely has to watch what she eats and her exercise. And while she almost never drinks, which my father does a lot of, has never smoked which my father has done for 50 years, and eats smaller portions, she has high blood pressure, diabetes, 2 strokes and a heart attack. So for some the journey to being fit and healthy is much easier than it is for others. This can be frustrating and discouraging, but by no means a reason to give up.0
-
Genetics play a role in your body type and where the fat collects on your body and yes, it is harder for some people to lose weight than others. HOWEVER you do not HAVE to be overweight. People tend to use genetics as an excuse for their obesity but it's really not an excuse. EVERYONE in my family is overweight. We are all short, pear shaped, hobbit looking things. However, I CHOOSE not to be overweight. I work very hard to maintain a healthy lifestyle and while it hasn't always been easy...it is doable. If you don't want to be overweight, you don't have to be.0
-
The answer is simple. The slender people don't eat more than they burn, while the overweight people do eat more than they burn. It really is that simple.They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.
I under stand your three points. On paper it seems so simple. I know some people like about what they eat and how much they train. But how is it that there are those that eat garbage and tons of calories, more than they burn in a day and manage to stay slender. And then there are those, who should be slender because they train like beast, eat right, yet are still overweight.0 -
But really thr its genetic thing is an excuse, Anyone can loose weight it just takes a change forever.
Theres truth to this, some of the physiological disorders case a slow down in total metabolism, or it could be certain foods cause an inflammatory response. Would need to change the intake to keep it matched to the outtake
inflammatory response is a bad thing?Inflammation: Both Friend and Foe
Published by Harriet Hall under Basic Science,Herbs & Supplements,Nutrition
A number of buzz-words appear repeatedly in health claims, such as natural, antioxidants, organic, and inflammation. Inflammation has been implicated in a number of chronic diseases, including diabetes, Parkinson’s, rheumatoid arthritis, allergies, atherosclerosis, and even cancer. Inflammation has been demonized, and is usually thought of as a bad thing. But it is not all bad.
In a study in Nature Medicine in September 2011, a research group led by Dr. Umut Ozcan at Children’s Hospital Boston (a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard Medical School) reported that two proteins activated by inflammation are crucial to maintaining normal blood sugar levels in obese and diabetic mice. This could be the beginning of a new paradigm. Ozcan says:
This finding is completely contrary to the general dogma in the diabetes field that low-grade inflammation in obesity causes insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. For 20 years, this inflammation has been seen as detrimental, whereas it is actually beneficial.
Increasing levels of these inflammatory signals might actually be therapeutic in diabetes and obesity. On the other hand, they might worsen inflammatory diseases like asthma and rheumatoid arthritis. Ozcan’s findings are intriguing and might eventually lead to new treatments, but there are no clinical applications as yet.
Inflammation is part of the body’s response to infection and tissue damage, and it is crucial to the healing process. It is important for muscle growth with exercise, but conversely, chronic inflammation may be part of the reason for muscle loss in aging. When inflammation is chronic, it can lead to a number of diseases, from atherosclerosis to rheumatoid arthritis. Inflammatory markers are prominent in obesity, and higher levels are associated with meals high in calories and in saturated fat. Strenuous exercise markedly increases the levels of inflammatory markers.
It is simplistic to talk of “inflammation” as a single phenomenon, since it is a complex response involving many different physiological processes, from vasodilation to neutrophil infiltration, from the complement system to cytokines. And its relationship to health is even more complex. The human organism is a mesh of interrelated networks, and it could be hazardous to meddle with one element without understanding how our intervention might affect other parts of the system.
Certain foods are hyped as anti-inflammatory and certain dietary supplements are marketed with claims that they are anti-inflammatory. Integrative medicine guru Andrew Weil promotes both foods and supplements. Unfortunately, it is not clear that they can actually reduce the kind of inflammation that is associated with chronic diseases, or that such reductions actually prevent or improve the clinical course of those diseases. It is conceivable that they might lead to harm as well as benefit. If they really diminish the body’s ability to mount an inflammatory response, wouldn’t that also tend to impair wound healing and response to infection? Fortunately, most of the anti-inflammatory diet recommendations are consistent with consensus recommendations for a healthy diet (lots of fruits and vegetables, etc.). Anti-inflammatory medications like NSAIDs and steroids do reduce inflammation, but they have had limited use in treating diseases associated with chronic inflammation, and they have problematic side effects. In fact, steroids make people more vulnerable to infection.
For the present, we have only hints. Research like Dr. Ozcan’s will help us better understand the risks, benefits, and complexities of inflammatory processes. Meanwhile, it’s a mistake to oversimplify and to assume inflammation is always a bad thing, and trying to prevent or treat it with special foods and supplements is little more than a shot in the dark, a gamble based on speculation. Eat your vegetables and stay tuned!0 -
The problem of obesity is a relatively recent one in human history. Before the age of abundance and desk jobs, it simply wasn't a problem. Prior to the industrial revolution (circa 1850s) it was rare for a person to be overweight, with the exception of the rich and/or social elite.
There are still many hunter gatherer tribes still in existence in parts of Africa and South America. Certainly some of them carry genetics that may predispose them to being overweight, but NONE of them are. And so was the case of native Americans before they were assimilated into western culture.
Now given that humans are genetically unchanged for the last 100,000 years, these observations would suggest that lifestyle plays a much bigger role in obesity than does genetics. Certainly there are disorders that raise the risk that a person could become overweight, but these are rare - much more rare than the current obesity rate. And these genetics have been circulating the human population since before we entered the civilized era.
So no, I don't buy the fact that a person is overweight because of a "fat" gene. Human history doesn't support it.0 -
The problem of obesity is a relatively recent one in human history. Before the age of abundance and desk jobs, it simply wasn't a problem. Prior to the industrial revolution (circa 1850s) it was rare for a person to be overweight, with the exception of the rich and/or social elite.
There are still many hunter gatherer tribes still in existence in parts of Africa and South America. Certainly some of them carry genetics that may predispose them to being overweight, but NONE of them are. And so was the case of native Americans before they were assimilated into western culture.
Now given that humans are genetically unchanged for the last 100,000 years, these observations would suggest that lifestyle plays a much bigger role in obesity than does genetics. Certainly there are disorders that raise the risk that a person could become overweight, but these are rare - much more rare than the current obesity rate. And these genetics have been circulating the human population since before we entered the civilized era.
So no, I don't buy the fact that a person is overweight because of a "fat" gene. Human history doesn't support it.
Hmm, you should really read some more history then.0 -
The answer is simple. The slender people don't eat more than they burn, while the overweight people do eat more than they burn. It really is that simple.They do one of the 3
eat to much
exercise to little
Lie about wehat they eat
No Human can fight the law of energy in / energy out.
Even people claiming thyroid problems, It only accounts plus around 10 pounds the rest is over eating.
I under stand your three points. On paper it seems so simple. I know some people like about what they eat and how much they train. But how is it that there are those that eat garbage and tons of calories, more than they burn in a day and manage to stay slender. And then there are those, who should be slender because they train like beast, eat right, yet are still overweight.
Its not that simple in every case. I know overweight teens that live at a special school for overweight children. Each child is prepared all their meals and calories are tailored to each student's needs. They live on campus and arent allowed to have any money so they cant go out and buy extra food. Every student works out 1 hour a day with a personal trainer. Yet despite doing everything that they should be doing, there are still many of them that aren't seeing the results that they should be achieving. How can that be explained?0 -
Yes, genetics can play a role. There are some people who are more genetically blessed than others without question.
Although, genetics is blamed far more often than it should be.
Have you ever seen a random Overweight Somalian amist the crowds of staving people?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions