If they only had a brain

14th May 2009

posted in Binge Eating Disorder, ED-NOS, Fat Bias, Health, Nutrition & Fitness, New Research |

Lucy Aphramor, a dietitian, researcher and co-founder of HAES UK, has a great story out in The Guardian this week about why Health at Every Size is the most effective and logical health approach available. I made the mistake of reading some of the comments, which, of course, bemoan how defeatist HAES is and insist that all one has to do to lose weight is “eat less, move more.” I think that anyone who trots out this tired old equation has A) never struggled with their weight; or B) are in their first weeks, months or year following a weight loss.

The equation of calories in/calories burned has its place in weight management, sure, but that it represents the end-all-be-all to weight loss seems ridiculously Pollyanna’ish in light of the overwhelming and complex evidence that has come to light about genetics and the way our bodies metabolize food, as well as the physiological ways in which different foods affect our brain’s neurochemistry. Also revealed are the true priorities of those opposed to HAES when all that is removed from an otherwise holistic approach to good health is the goal of weight loss. As a recent Associated Press/i-Village study reveals, is our weight-loss obsession stirred by a concern for health or for a beach-ready bikini body, health be damned?

Several reports from the past few weeks highlight some of the unwitting ways in which our brains play a role in our weight:

A report in the health journal Obesity suggests that public health campaigns do more harm than good. The research shows that public service announcements designed to encourage overeaters to abstain from sweet and fatty foods and get more exercise may actually inspire people to indulge even more.

Another study conducted at the Oregon Research Institute should come as no surprise to anyone who’s ever opted for celery over chocolate. The research suggests that people who eat low-fat and low-calorie foods experience less of a “reward” than if they ate the full-fat or higher-calorie alternative. Even before consumption, the simple fact of “knowing” the food to be low-fat removed much of the pleasure from the experience ““This study shows that it may not be such a good idea to have all those low-fat alternatives since people may be experiencing less of a sense of reward when they eat – and that would make these low-calorie foods completely useless,” said senior researcher Eric Stice.

In a separate study published in the Journal of Eating Disorders, Stice’s group examined the brain chemistry of emotional eaters versus non-emotional eaters. Emotional eaters showed a higher level of activity in their brains’ reward centers in response to eating than observed in the control group.
A similar study by the California Institute of Technology found significant differences in the brain activity between people who had self-control in making food choices and people who lacked self-control. The research showed that an area of the brain called the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) behaves differently in people with no self-control.

Former FDA commissioner David Kessler appeared on NPR’s Fresh Air yesterday to talk about his new book, The End of Overeating. Kessler came off as a real food-killjoy overall, but he nonetheless raised important points about the ways in which sugar, salt and fat affect our brain’s neurochemistry, and how Big Food is using that technology to keep us coming back for more. It sounds as if Kessler’s book talks about the same kinds of thing Linda Bacon also discusses in Health at Every Size, but with a decidedly greater fat-shaming slant.

Normally I’d be excited at these findings, for they show just how complex and organic the factors that affect our weights to be, but sadly, I foresee that instead of showing respect for the awesome ways in which our brains work, they’ll just be used in ways designed to circumvent centuries of evolution. Case in point: A 230-pound mother of two underwent brain surgery this March as part of a federally-approved study when even stomach stapling failed to produce desired weight-loss results.

Click to Bookmark

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 14th, 2009 at 12:10 pm and is filed under Binge Eating Disorder, ED-NOS, Fat Bias, Health, Nutrition & Fitness, New Research. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On May 14th, 2009, Living400lbs said:

“This study shows that it may not be such a good idea to have all those low-fat alternatives since people may be experiencing less of a sense of reward when they eat – and that would make these low-calorie foods completely useless,” said senior researcher Eric Stice.

Useless for trying to trick yourself into weight loss, but not useless for everyone. A friend controls his IBS by eating an extremely low-fat diet, and yes, he finds fat-free brownies quite satisfying – because they are brownies that don’t results in passing out due to extreme abdominal pain.

Between his experiences and the friend who carries an Epi-Pen in case of accidental seafood ingestion I have lost patience with people who say they “can’t eat” whatever is not on their chosen diet – especially when they then turn around and eat it and then get SHOCKED that I ask if I should call 911. If you don’t need 911 when you eat something you “can’t” eat then guess what, you CAN fucking well eat it so stop fucking LYING to people.

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 2:13 pm

2 On May 14th, 2009, Living400lbs said:

Okay, sorry to spew. And agreed on how people can’t seem to get “but we must all be thin!” out of their heads long enough to realize “hey, this stuff is pretty complex and interesting”.

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

3 On May 14th, 2009, JupiterPluvius said:

I think that anyone who trots out this tired old equation {“eat less, move more”} has A) never struggled with their weight; or B) are in their first weeks, months or year following a weight loss.

Don’t overlook C)–the self-loathing fat, chubby, stocky, or average person who REALLY NEEDS TO BELIEVE that the magic bullet could make it happen for them.

See under: Frances Kuffel, author of Passing for Thin, who gained back 70+ of the 150+ pounds she lost, and is now writing a book about diet failure, while continuing to diet and blog about dieting. The cognitive dissonance doesn’t seem to register one bit. (That said, Ms. Kuffel also lives with binge eating issues, so her issues with food and health aren’t just about starving herself to look like a magazine cover.)

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

4 On May 14th, 2009, Annabel said:

Wow. That’s some interesting stuff. I really need some time to mull these things over and would like to look more deeply into the research quoted above. However, taking things at face value, here’s my unrequested 2 cents:
1. stupid people exist in all shapes and sizes – i.e. the lady who underwent brain surgery. we could point our fingers at society, at the media, at Big Pharma, at whomever, but there does come a point when personal responsibility & smarts SHOULD come into play.
2. You’re right that there is more to weight loss than calories in and calories burned. but in light of the fact that the technology (or money) to find out all of the little genetic and physiological factors we are “against” is not widely accessible, the calorie-watching/moving-more lifestyle change is the best and most safe “bet” that I can think of.
3. Am very intrigued by HAES and will look into it! If it promotes the idea that healthy people don’t come out of cookie cutter molds in the shape of Barbie Dolls, I’m all for it!
Thanks for your continually stimulating posts!

Annabel

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

5 On May 14th, 2009, Jill said:

I’m nodding in agreement with Living400lbs; I too am uncomfortable with people saying they “can’t” eat something because it doesn’t fit some weight-loss diet they are on. I have to eat a gluten-free diet or I become very unpleasantly ill (though there’s still no need to call 911, as there’s nothing they can do about it anyway). I worry that when I ask for help with finding gluten-free food that people will think I’m living by arbitrary weight-loss rules (especially since I’m fat) and won’t understand that eating gluten will lead to significant suffering.

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 5:34 pm

6 On May 14th, 2009, Marsha @ A Weight Lifted said:

Re: “The equation of calories in/calories burned has its place in weight management….”

I just tweeted you a short note about this, but then thought, duh, I could put my point in a comment and have a lot more than 140 characters to talk about it!

I was drawing your attention to a study published in this month’s Nutrition Reviews that looks at the calories in vs. calories out equation. It basically says it might be good for looking back and figuring out energy imbalances, but to use it in looking forward, e.g., for weight-loss advice, it’s not so good.

Several things come into play that make it not so good, which would require I write another blog post to discuss, but I did mention the stand-out factors for me in my blog post this week. I related it to the popular Eat This Not That books. If you’re interested, check it out here http://bit.ly/1GmBBs

Your post here just adds to the argument that the equation really isn’t that useful. But then again, I’m highly biased against calorie information in general.

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

7 On May 14th, 2009, Bree said:

I think it’s key when talking about size acceptance and rights that we don’t label people who need to follow a specific diet for medical reasons like diabetes, IBS (of which I suffer) and gluten/other food allergies as dieting just to look socially acceptable. Sometimes we forget not all “diets” are really for the goal of weight loss.

posted on May 14th, 2009 at 6:46 pm

8 On May 15th, 2009, Rachel_in_WY said:

Why is a 230 pound woman having weight loss surgery to begin with? Jeez. It would be interesting (and depressing) to study the changes that went on in the weight loss surgery industry when they stopped being something that was used in only the most extreme cases and became a part of the mainstream weight loss industrial complex, as they seem to have done at some point in the last few years.

posted on May 15th, 2009 at 10:42 am

9 On May 15th, 2009, Tiana said:

Normally I’d be excited at these findings, for they show just how complex and organic the factors that affect our weights to be, but sadly, I foresee that instead of showing respect for the awesome ways in which our brains work, they’ll just be used in ways designed to circumvent centuries of evolution.

So true. I’m the kind of person who gets all excited about the complexity of human bodies, too … only I can never really talk about it because people will be like, “Oh noes! Don’t tell me weight loss is hard!”

That said, “people with no self-control”? NONE?! I call this an exaggeration.

posted on May 15th, 2009 at 11:14 am

10 On May 15th, 2009, Rachel said:

but in light of the fact that the technology (or money) to find out all of the little genetic and physiological factors we are “against” is not widely accessible, the calorie-watching/moving-more lifestyle change is the best and most safe “bet” that I can think of.

You should look more into HAES, because it actually represents not only the safest bet, but the most effective. HAES does stress moving more, but for overall mental and physical health, not just weight management. And while it teaches you to be cognizant of your body’s energy needs, it stresses intuitive eating over calorie-watching.

@Bree: There is a difference between diet — as in what you eat on regular basis — and dieting — food restriction in the pursuit of weight loss. I don’t think anyone would fault someone with a special-needs diet for health/spiritual/religious reasons.

@Rachel: That’s exactly what I thought. It said that she had the surgery after diets and even stomach stapling failed her. But another article on her said that at her highest weight, she was 479-pounds, so obviously dieting and gastric bypass surgery were effective to a degree — just not the degree she had hoped for, I guess. I think that after decades of dieting and even weight loss surgery your body still isn’t your ideal weight, maybe it’s not your body that needs adjusting.

posted on May 15th, 2009 at 11:27 am