Live data from Hacker News

Why We Get Fat

sciencebasedmedicine.org

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: Why We Get Fat

#61

Too many times have physicians, from my point of view, fall short of common agreement with regards to my health, especially when it comes to nutrition. I tend to be skeptical of their opinion on the matter, more even so since I switched to a paleo diet and literally dropped the weight that I was supposed to be "genetically" stuck with. So have several of my friends around me. I doubt the answer is as easy as some wou…

Doctor here. I agree with you about being skeptical of physicians' nutritional advice; we generally aren't nutrition experts and internists, especially, are jaded by the vast number of hospitalized patients we see who have simply abused their bodies with food and drink for decades. That said, you echo an argument that's as useless as me telling patients "calories in What I tell my fat patients who are starting out is…

I'm pretty sure the calories in/out model works to a certain extent. But the paleo diet helped me structure my diet in a way that lets me focusing on simple, healthy food, instead of quantities.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#62
post #58

The big mistake begins here: "Simple physics requires that to lose weight, we must burn more calories than we ingest" THAT fallacy is how the author leads the reader in to HIS strawman argument, that somehow Taubes is unaware of, or disregards, the laws of thermodynamics. 1) Ingesting calories is not relevant, digesting is. 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever. We use various components of food as raw materials…

Was waiting to see someone to make the distinction between ingestion and digestion. Most people would consider me skinny... and I always eating and often things that most would consider fattening or unhealthy. People will remark, "How do you stay so skinny?! You're so lucky!"... Except, I would be willing to bet that I have a digestive disorder. Which one? I don't know and I don't care to find out. For the most part…

going to take this on a slightly weird angle here:

Does your faeces float or have oily discharge around it?

Malabsorption of fat is essentially defined by the clinical features that can be easily determined.

Do you get bloated, have excessive flatulus, or discharge? All signs of malabsorption as well.

It is relatively unlikely that people have digestive problems long term without developing consequences as there are pretty much always side-effects from having nutrients running around a 20m track inside your body loaded with bacteria but not being taken into your body.

What you don't absorb, your bacteria will run riot on, with subsequent symptoms;

And if you have a fat malabsorption problem you will rapidly develop symptoms (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipase_inhibitors for induced fat malabsorption)

Re: Why We Get Fat

#63

The big mistake begins here: "Simple physics requires that to lose weight, we must burn more calories than we ingest" THAT fallacy is how the author leads the reader in to HIS strawman argument, that somehow Taubes is unaware of, or disregards, the laws of thermodynamics. 1) Ingesting calories is not relevant, digesting is. 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever. We use various components of food as raw materials…

* > 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever.*

- It seems like you would know this but we very literally do "Burn" all of our calories that go into heat production -

The Mitochondrial pathways very literally burn/react carbon with oxygen to produce H2O and CO2 incredibly efficiently. (67% of usable energy from this reaction is captured and stored in ATP, the remainder is given off as heat)

This process is significantly more efficient than any 'burning' we do in industry for example, but is exactly the same process as what is happening in a coal power plant, just on a much more efficient scale.

Even if we take proteins -> amino acids -> back to proteins, we are using energy in the form of ATP (the cellular battery) that was the product of the burning in the mitochondrial power plants, in order to have allowed the amino acids to be ready to be formed into new protein.

So we literally DO burn ALL of our calories (You could argue that glycolysis isn't burning, but this process is very inefficient and is responsible for <<<0.1% of ATP production) This is undeniable scientific fact.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#64
post #63

The big mistake begins here: "Simple physics requires that to lose weight, we must burn more calories than we ingest" THAT fallacy is how the author leads the reader in to HIS strawman argument, that somehow Taubes is unaware of, or disregards, the laws of thermodynamics. 1) Ingesting calories is not relevant, digesting is. 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever. We use various components of food as raw materials…

* > 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever.* - It seems like you would know this but we very literally do "Burn" all of our calories that go into heat production - The Mitochondrial pathways very literally burn/react carbon with oxygen to produce H2O and CO2 incredibly efficiently. (67% of usable energy from this reaction is captured and stored in ATP, the remainder is given off as heat) This process is significa…

Cool explanation. I didn't conceptually get that the mitochondrial energy process is the same as a coal power plant. But if everything gets burned, how do I build new cell walls and stuff? Where does the actual matter come from?

Some of the matter must be used to create matter directly, rather than as simple an energy source. Or if all the matter in my body is grown/created entirely from energy and cell division (can't be true of essential vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and fatty acids, by definition) isn't growing and repairing my body going to be a huge factor in energy consumption?

Re: Why We Get Fat

#65
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* > 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever.* - It seems like you would know this but we very literally do "Burn" all of our calories that go into heat production - The Mitochondrial pathways very literally burn/react carbon with oxygen to produce H2O and CO2 incredibly efficiently. (67% of usable energy from this reaction is captured and stored in ATP, the remainder is given off as heat) This process is significa…

Cool explanation. I didn't conceptually get that the mitochondrial energy process is the same as a coal power plant. But if everything gets burned, how do I build new cell walls and stuff? Where does the actual matter come from? Some of the matter must be used to create matter directly, rather than as simple an energy source. Or if all the matter in my body is grown/created entirely from energy and cell division (can…

Lay(wo)man's understanding: You burn the oxygen, one molecule at a time. But there is more in your food than oxygen.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#66

This is the best article I've read on dieting: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/08/27/th... IMO, if you eat fewer calories than you expend, you'll lose weight. BUT I do think that you can eat more calories than you expend and still lose weight. Likewise, the amount of weight one loses/gains eating the same number of calories and expending the same number is variable based on the actual person and f…

> BUT I do think that you can eat more calories than you expend and still lose weight. Then where does the energy go? The only way you can eat less than you expend and still lose weight is to not adsorb some of what you eat, and doing that, while possible with laxatives use, bulimia, and certain drugs, tends to have messy consequences.

Laxatives really are not necessary to have inefficient digestion or energy storage. There are plenty of skinny people who have a hard time putting on weight even though they regularly eat like hogs.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#67
post #36
post #2

"So, why does it get warmer in the summer?" "Because our hemisphere takes in more calories than it gives off, causing it to get warmer." "Well, I mean I suppose that's true in the strictest sense, but is there a reason we can come up with tha--" "What, you don't believe in thermodynamics? What a crackpot!"

> "What, you don't believe in thermodynamics? What a crackpot!" Come back to me when you've heard a few people say that it is physically impossible for them to lose weight regardless of what they do. They think they could be eating nothing but celery and water and still maintain an upwards trend. Thermodynamics works. That means it is always possible to lose weight, not that it is always easy. A weight-loss plan that…

I think the point is to be healthy over being thin. Some people have bigger bodies and have a metabolism that leads to them carrying more weight. There's nothing wrong with this. I mean, obesity is another thing in itself - nobody is naturally obese unless they suffer from some sort of medical condition, but the point is if we eat healthy - a decent amount of nutrients without going hog-wild, avoiding shitty processed foods, and also doing a good amount of physical activity, it will make our bodies happy and we can be healthy. I do hate the social pressure to conform to some sort of mythical perfect body, but at the same time I think looking after your body - not starving or totally over-indulging it is important.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#68
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool explanation. I didn't conceptually get that the mitochondrial energy process is the same as a coal power plant. But if everything gets burned, how do I build new cell walls and stuff? Where does the actual matter come from? Some of the matter must be used to create matter directly, rather than as simple an energy source. Or if all the matter in my body is grown/created entirely from energy and cell division (can…

Lay(wo)man's understanding: You burn the oxygen, one molecule at a time. But there is more in your food than oxygen.

I think you mean carbon instead of oxygen, and it's 2 at a time, not one at a time.

Your analogy is roughly correct but in the base, reductionist biochemistry of which the body functions, you have fats (chains of carbons with hydrogens on them - directly burned this way), carbs (basic form C6H12O6) which are also directly burnt this way with water coming off, and protein, which has occasional nitrogen atoms and some sulphur atoms. Proteins can also carry metals - so bits of iron or copper or other things we need to make some proteins function correctly are 'carried' into the intestinal system this way. The only other thing we really need is lots and lots of Phosphate, which we take in largely through consumption of DNA in things we eat

If proteins are to be burnt in mitochondria the nitrogens are converted to urea and excreted.

Vitamins are just arrangements of carbon atoms with the occasional nitrogen and oxygen and hydrogen around. Some have a single copper or zinc atom there too.

We really don't use any more than this, our body literally does just run on carbon. To complete your statement, although there is more in food than just carbon, there really isn't much that we are interested in (biochemically speaking) than the carbon, although the body has uses for some of the myriad forms that are created in other plants and animals that we can't synthesise ourselves.

Re: Why We Get Fat

#69
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* > 2) We don't "burn" any calories whatsoever.* - It seems like you would know this but we very literally do "Burn" all of our calories that go into heat production - The Mitochondrial pathways very literally burn/react carbon with oxygen to produce H2O and CO2 incredibly efficiently. (67% of usable energy from this reaction is captured and stored in ATP, the remainder is given off as heat) This process is significa…

Cool explanation. I didn't conceptually get that the mitochondrial energy process is the same as a coal power plant. But if everything gets burned, how do I build new cell walls and stuff? Where does the actual matter come from? Some of the matter must be used to create matter directly, rather than as simple an energy source. Or if all the matter in my body is grown/created entirely from energy and cell division (can…

Thankyou. It is quite amazing and fully understanding it carries a sense of deep beauty and appreciation for the complexities and interdependencies by which our body sustains life.

re your question: You have 2 overarching (and this is simplifying slightly) thermodynamic gradients operating in the body: Catabolism and Anabolism.

Catabolic processes break down polymers (of which everything is composed). For example: in the Carbohydrate family, we have Starches or Glycogen; a polymer of Glucose monomers. In the Fats family, Triacylglycerides (TAGs) and Fatty acids are 3 and 2 polymer complexes of the standard 'fat' chain. Proteins are polymers of the 20 biological amino acid monomers, which are combined in an infinite variety of combinations and lengths to create the different structures of our body.

We break Fats and Carbs down to their monomers to ingest them into the body (enzymes etc in the Gut). Malabsorption here will result in excess nutrients in our GIT which bacteria can then feast on, causing medical symptoms of maldigestion. Bacteria also operate in a complex synergy with our GIT to keep everything 'regular' however that's far beyond the scope of this discussion, and pushing the limits of the understanding of science even.

Further catabolic processes go on to take fats and carbs down to the burning stage in the mitochondria, which results in the production of ATP, the body's fuel source (you can think of carbs and fats as the crude unrefined elements and then ATP is the refined, useful fuel which every source in the cell which requires energy can utilise)

Production of ATP is in itself a Anabolic process by definition, as it is a more energetic molecule than it's precursors. Note that the production of ATP is coupled to a catabolic process, the burning of carbon in the Krebs Cycle inside the mitochondria.

ATP is the energy source which is then utilised by different proteins in the cell to provide the energy to catalyse the formation of monomers into polymers - this is the process that creates structural proteins, the elongation and duplication of DNA, elements of the Phospholipid Bilayer (the cell membrane - which has 2 fatty acids/fats as the tail) and all the other cellular components.

Note that Anabolism is an energetically expensive process, as you are building molecules which have more energy than the precursors, and so you require a fuel source for this. this is really what we mean when biologists say that the whole system is driven by thermodynamics.

---

TL;DR - We break everything down into it's monomer subunits to get it into our bloodstream. Special transports exist for Amino Acids, Vitamins, Nucleotides, Simple Carbs, Fats etc. Once inside, our protein cellular machinery stores some energy (in Glycogen or Fat), Burns some energy (Energy consumption is coupled to energy expenditure at the mitochondrial level - rate of production of ATP is limited by rate of consumption; O2 is the limiting factor when consumption is high), and uses amino acids and fats, and carbons from Carbohydrates as different structural and functional components in our cell.

So yes, you are right, we don't burn everything to H2O and CO2. But essentially everything that produces the useful energy in our body does go through this process.

I hope this sort-of answers your question even though I got a bit side-tracked

Re: Why We Get Fat

#70
post #68
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lay(wo)man's understanding: You burn the oxygen, one molecule at a time. But there is more in your food than oxygen.

I think you mean carbon instead of oxygen, and it's 2 at a time, not one at a time. Your analogy is roughly correct but in the base, reductionist biochemistry of which the body functions, you have fats (chains of carbons with hydrogens on them - directly burned this way), carbs (basic form C6H12O6) which are also directly burnt this way with water coming off, and protein, which has occasional nitrogen atoms and some…

You know, I feel really crappy today. I am not finding anything that readily matches my recollection of the process, though glycolysis and atp come up in my search and that partially matches my memory. Maybe you could link me to something that fairly clearly shows what you mean? My understanding is "burn" = "consume oxygen".

Thanks.

Post reply on HN