Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 11, 2010 at 11:56am

A lot of hispanic and Native American population where I live. And it seems that seeing a child who isn't significantly overweight is the exception to the rule.

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on September 11, 2010 at 7:49pm

Jo Jerome, thank you so much for commenting. It tells me that someone is interested in reading this stuff!

There's an interesting story regarding Pima populations and their tendency toward overweight and diabetes. Briefly, it was hypothesized that " for thousands of years populations who relied on farming, hunting and fishing for food, such as the Pima Indians, experienced alternating periods of feast and famine. Neel said that to adapt to these extreme changes in caloric needs, these people developed a thrifty gene that allowed them to store fat during times of plenty so that they would not starve during times of famine." With a change to westernized/Americanized diet and lifestyle, the tendency to store calories as fat is now working against these populations. (I wonder if this is also a situation among Samoans, more than 75% of urban Samoans are obese according to WHO definition of obesity).

The linked article goes on to say "Recently, Ravussin visited a Pima community living as their ancestors did in a remote area of the Sierra Madre mountains of Mexico. These Mexican Pimas are genetically the same as the Pima Indians of Arizona. Out of 35 Mexican Pimas studied, only three had diabetes and the population as a whole was not overweight, according to Ravussin."

I don't know if there is modern evidence for this thrifty gene hypothesis among the Pima or if it has been debunked. A google search brings up some genetic research, such as here, implicating "a gene called FABP2 that may contribute to insulin resistance." another very arcane research report here implicates at least one gene related to diabetes among Pima. "The result offers suggestive evidence for the presence of a gene affecting obesity in this region."

Even with a gene identified in this population, or a group of genes, the best way to work with the tehdency toward obesity still falls back to change of lifestyle and diet. Not an easy solution, but there won't be a pill to fix this situation.

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 12, 2010 at 5:50pm

I too have heard the Thrifty Gene hypothesis, mostly from Natives themselves. But like you, haven't seen if there have been hard studies to back it up or not. It does make sense though.

Have also been told by many natives that wheat - which most people throughout the world have some degree of intolerance for - Native Americans tend to have even less tolerance for. That it is much more likely to be converted to fat. This too, from a purely anecdotal view, sounds plausible as the Americas practiced a lot less wheat cultivation up until 500 years ago than many other areas of the world.

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on September 12, 2010 at 6:28pm

Interesting thoughts.

In general, wheat intolerance is an immune reaction caused by antibodies to gluten, the wheat protein. This reaction causes breakdown of the absorptive tissues in the small intestine, resulting in malabsorption - nutrients pass through without absorption. There is often chronic diarrhea, which is often the 1st step to diagnosis. This causes malnutrition and underweight status. It's called celiac sprue. If I remember correctly, this is most common for people with Celtic or Jewish heritage. I don't know about the wheat grain resulting in an overweight issue, except that when bran is removed, it has a higher relative amount of carbohydrate and is more fattening to all of us.

Also, I was under the impression that wheat was a purely European plant - the grain was Maize / corn. Similar to SE Asia the grain was rice until globalization. Was there wheat in the Americas, at all, before Europeans brought it here?

A side note - even though we say there is no genetic basis for RACE, there are genetic differences among ethnic groups. This demonstrates one of those differences.

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 13, 2010 at 3:23pm

A side note - even though we say there is no genetic basis for RACE, there are genetic differences among ethnic groups. This demonstrates one of those differences.

Yes, a HUGE distinction.

If one wants to split hairs, there is a genetic mutation/adaptation that accounts for skin color; either your DNA is coded to produce more melanin or less. But it's no more a genetic difference than blonde versus brunette, or blue eyes versus brown eyes.

Anthropology class the other day we discussed Kennewick Man. 9,000 year old skeleton found in Washington State that has curiously caucasoid features rather than Native American.

And there again lies the shitstorm that results from the layman's interpretation of "Caucasoid features" as "White." Just because caucasoid features today tend to go along with light skin doesn't necessarily mean that's true 9,000 years ago. Even if he was light of skin and European of descent should not mean anything to the issue of who 'discovered' America or who the country 'belongs' to. If there were Europeans in America 9,000 years ago, by the time Columbus got here they appear to have either died out or more likely got absorbed into the more dominant Asian/Mongol genetic pool.

Once again, underscoring the silliness of trying to separate everyone by 'race.' It's skin deep. Literally.

Permalink Reply by Blade Of The Bunny on September 11, 2010 at 8:55pm

I took a health psych class and what was presented was that Europeans have developed a higher metabolic rate due to evolutionary progress. That certain high caloric foods had been introduced into their populations well before the other ethnic groups and therefore have developed this trait earlier.

What is also noteworthy is that food companies specifically target consumers hardwired desire for fatty, salty, sugary foods. Like what you brought up about the alternating feast and famine times, whenever people taste sugary, fatty, salty foods, they eat it in abundance because of our biological predisposition. The companies isolate those flavors and develop synthetic products that our bodies have yet to metabolize at a sufficient rate to keep weight down.

Have you seen the movie Food Inc? I highly recommend it. Companies put sugar into products you wouldn't think would have sugar in them or worse, use high fructose corn syrup(HFCS). In a Princeton study, it was shown that all sugars aren't equal. "The first study showed that male rats given water sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup in addition to a standard diet of rat chow gained much more weight than male rats that received water sweetened with table sugar, or sucrose, in conjunction with the standard diet." I think its despicable that these companies also target children's desire for colorful, toy products. Making these foods either resemble toys or selling them with toys.

I'm very interested in this, not just as a Native American but for people who are unaware of this and believe they're buying healthy food for their families and themselves. I try to talk about it as much as I can because people should be informed.

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on September 12, 2010 at 6:46pm

I wonder about that higher metabolic. Was it measured? There is certainly no lack of obesity among European Americans, although Europe so far appears less generously proportioned than USA white people.

That being said, there is that Thrifty Gene hypothesis mentioned above, as well as studies related to glucose tolerance for Pima and some study of Samoans. Probably not much, I would have to do more research on the topic.

I have seen Food Inc but it's been a while. I think there have been discussions on hormonal responses to high fructose corn syrup, I don't know if any of it is conclusive.

What I do know is that packing in high concentrations of calories well beyond what is consumed for activity, results in increasing body fat levels. An excess of 100 calories per day results in weight gain of about 10 pounds per year. 100 calories isn't much, when you read labels. 1 ice cream bar is 150 cal. Over 5 years, that's 50 pounds extra, over 10 years, 100 pounds extra. 8 oz of coca cola classic is 98 cal. A large serving of French fries is 539 cal, so all you need is that once weekly, plus 8oz of coke for 4 days per week, and you have that 10# weight gain per year.

Another rough measure is 3500 calories = 1 pound. So, to lose 1 pound in 1 week, you need to decrease intake by 500 calories per day for 1 week, or burn off 500 calories per day with increased exercise.

What this all adds up to is the factory produced western diet is a great way to increase body weight for everyone. Some faster than others.