Interpretating Peptides, Food Intake, and Body Weight - POSTED ON: Mar 31, 2013
Today I watched a technical, but interesting, video of a University lecture given on March 26, 2013 by Stephen C. Woods about Peptides, Food Intake and Body Weight: Problems of Interpretation.
Peptides are organic substances of which the molecules are structurally like those of proteins, but smaller. Peptide Hormones include insulin, leptin, ghrelin, glucagon, growth hormone, obestatin as well as many, many others.
For many years Dr. Woods has been involved in obesity scientific research, primarily re insulin.
He said that a key question is whether the Responses that counter drug/food effects are actually Unconditional, invariant and whether or not traditional concepts of Homeostatsis are viable.
In considering this question, note the following:
Homeostaisis --- Unconditioned stimulas equals Unconditioned Response.
There are ... Homeostatic Controls - Hypothalamus (part of the brain primarily involved with involuntary stimulas and response of Peptides) and.... Non-Homeostatic Controls – Amugdala, Accumbens, etc ( parts of the brain involving Anxiety, social situations, learning, hedonics, etc.)
The process of Homostaisis can be disturbed by Non-Homeostatic Controls.
Food intake involves BOTH types of Controls at the same time. Food intake is a Behavior which involves BOTH (unconditioned) physiological and (conditioned) psychological factors: An Example of a Conditioned stimulas and Conditioned response is Pavlov’s dog.
Based on his many years of involvement with scientific research re Peptides, Dr. Woods states the following Conclusions:
Conclusion 1: Different labs get different results when administering Peptides and assessing food inake.
Conclusion 2: Peptides alter food intake in some situations and not others.
Conclusion 3: The ability of a Peptide to alter food intake varies within the same lab.
Conclusion 4: Subtle, or not so subtle, environmental factors can determine whether a Peptide influences food intake, and can even reverse the direction of the response.
To watch the lecture click the following link: Peptides, Food Intake and Body Weight: Problems of I...
More About Calories - POSTED ON: Mar 21, 2013
For the past eight-and-a-half years I’ve entered all of my daily food into a computer program that tells me the micronutrients in that food, including calories. The computer program that I choose to use is called DietPower.
I’ve written quite a lot about calories, including the impossibility of achieving a totally accurate calorie count. Below are links to two of those articles: Do Calories Matter? Calorie Detective – Lying Food Labels
A calorie is simply a measurement of energy, the amount of heat that something gives off through chemical processes. This is an “inexact” scientific concept which has been simplified for general use. Although there is nothing “perfectly accurate” about a calorie measurement, at this time there doesn’t appear to be an alternative way for Science to better measure the potential energy which is contained inside foods.
For me, “counting calories” is personally helpful as a “general” measuring tool, while understanding that:
Even though it is true that our bodies process different macronutrients differently, … at the end of the day… it still remains that if a body consumes more energy than a body expends, it will accumulate fat.
The article below states the Paleo / Low-Carb position against using calories as a food measurement tool, which is basically: “The concept of the “calorie”, as applied to nutrition, is an oversimplification so extreme as to be untrue in practice.”
There Is No Such Thing As A “Calorie” (To Your Body) by J. Stanton, online Paleo blogger, &n...
Unrealistic Expectations - POSTED ON: Feb 08, 2013
We live in a world of Unrealistic Expectations. Like I keep saying: Being Fat is Hard Losing Weight is Hard Maintaining Weight is Hard Choose your Hard.
Fat Is Officially Incurable (According to Science) By: David Wong Let's get this straight: The number of people who go from fat to thin, and stay there, statistically rounds down to zero. Every study says so. No study says otherwise. None. Oh, you can lose a ton of weight. You'll gain it back. Here's one study running the numbers. Here's a much larger analysis of every long-term weight loss study they could find. They all find the exact same thing: You can lose and keep off some minor amount, 10 or 15 pounds, for the rest of your life -- it's hard, but it can be done. Rarer cases may keep off a little more. But no one goes from actually fat to actually thin and stays thin permanently.
And when I say "no one," I mean those cases are so obscenely rare that they don't even appear on the chart. They can't even find enough such people to include in the studies. It's like trying to study people who have survived falling out of planes. Being fat is effectively incurable, every study shows it, and no one will admit it. So the guy or girl you see in the "Before" and "After" photos in weight loss commercials, who completely changed body type with diet and exercise? You know, like Jared from Subway, who lost 230 pounds? Either they're about to be fat again in a couple of years, or they're a medical freak occurrence, like the sick guy who was told he had six months to live but miraculously survives 20 years. That guy exists, we all know famous examples. But it's a rare, freak situation, living in defiance of all of the physical processes at work. How rare? Well, this person did the math and as far as they could tell, two out of 1,000 Weight Watchers customers actually maintain large weight losses permanently. Two out of a thousand. That means if you are fat, you are 25 times more likely to survive getting shot in the head ...
Research Study regarding Obesity Myths - POSTED ON: Feb 07, 2013
A recent research study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has received quite a lot of recent media coverage. Here are the basics of that study.
Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity Research Study Published 1/31/2013 in the New England Journal of Medicine.
BACKGROUND Many beliefs about obesity persist in the absence of supporting scientific evidence (presumptions); some persist despite contradicting evidence (myths). The promulgation of unsupported beliefs may yield poorly informed policy decisions, inaccurate clinical and public health recommendations, and an unproductive allocation of research resources and may divert attention away from useful, evidence-based information. METHODS Using Internet searches of popular media and scientific literature, we identified, reviewed, and classified obesity-related myths and presumptions. We also examined facts that are well supported by evidence, with an emphasis on those that have practical implications for public health, policy, or clinical recommendations. RESULTS We identified seven obesity-related myths concerning the effects of small sustained increases in energy intake or expenditure, establishment of realistic goals for weight loss, rapid weight loss, weight-loss readiness, physical-education classes, breast-feeding, and energy expended during sexual activity. We also identified six presumptions about the purported effects of regularly eating breakfast, early childhood experiences, eating fruits and vegetables, weight cycling, snacking, and the built (i.e., human-made) environment. Finally, we identified nine evidence-supported facts that are relevant for the formulation of sound public health, policy, or clinical recommendations. CONCLUSIONS False and scientifically unsupported beliefs about obesity are pervasive in both scientific literature and the popular press. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.)
Below are the myths, presumptions and facts:
Here are the beliefs that were found to be untrue.
The Myths...
How Often Should We Eat? - POSTED ON: Jan 30, 2013
What about eating frequency? How often should we eat? Should we eat 3 Square Meals? Or should we eat 6 Small Meals? Or should we eat only inside a window of 8 hours or 5 hours?
Or should we, intermittently, have days with only one small meal, or even zero food in a total water fast?
Or should we eat whenever we feel Hunger? Each of these “Diets”, “Non-Diets”, “Ways-of-Eating”, or “Lifestyles” claims that Scientific Research supports their individual position. So what DO we do? The following article by Dr. Yoni Freedhoff of WeightyMatters, supports my own personal position on this question.
Does New Study settle the 3 Square vs. 6 Small vs. the 8 hr Diet Debate?
So this month yet another study in a never-ending line of studies looking to compare the impact of meal frequency on fullness and biochemistry came out. This one suggested that small frequent helped decrease energy intake in normal weight men.
Honestly I pretty much disregard all of these studies.
Not because I'm doubting or questioning their results, just that I don't think their results really matter.
What I mean is that all of these studies fail to address the practical aspects of living with their recommendations, and as a clinician, that's really all that matters to me.
I've seen people controlling calories, loving life and preserving health with 6 small meals daily. I've seen people do the same on 2, 3, 4, and in some cases even 1 meal a day.
Regardless of the research that comes out, what matters more than what a physiology paper says is how you personally feel.
In my office we do tend to start people on small and frequent meals and snacks. But if that doesn't suit or help the individual we'll shift to 3 square meals. We've also recommended the intermittent fasting style that's suddenly finding some traction on the diet book shelves.
You need to find a life that you enjoy, and just because a new study or diet book suggests there's a "better", or "right", way, if you don't happen to enjoy it, it just isn't going to work.
The specific new study referred to is: Psychology and Behavior www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031938413000243
According to all of the scientific research I’ve read, when we get right down to it, any actual “Health” or “Metabolic” Benefit Differences between all of these eating plans are truly miniscule, and therefore, not even worth the individual effort of personal consideration. The question to consider is which one can we DO? I ask myself:
Mar 01, 2021 DietHobby: A Digital Scrapbook. 2000+ Blogs and 500+ Videos in DietHobby reflect my personal experience in weight-loss and maintenance. One-size-doesn't-fit-all, and I address many ways-of-eating whenever they become interesting or applicable to me.
Jun 01, 2020 DietHobby is my Personal Blog Website. DietHobby sells nothing; posts no advertisements; accepts no contributions. It does not recommend or endorse any specific diets, ways-of-eating, lifestyles, supplements, foods, products, activities, or memberships.
May 01, 2017 DietHobby is Mobile-Friendly. Technical changes! It is now easier to view DietHobby on iPhones and other mobile devices.