To think that obesity mostly has to do with your genes

[penandpaperlife]

I've been living with my best friend for a year now due to some personal issues with my STBXH, and this has been something I've been wondering about. My best friend eats the exact same thing as me, with the same exact portion size. She also snacks on nuts and/or biscuits throughout the day (we're a freelance team so we spend basically all day together) while I don't.

Why then, is she slim and I'm not?

The only difference in our lifestyle is that she goes for a 15min run every morning. I've read studies and charts though and that seems to only burn about 150kcals. Surely that wouldn't even offset her snacks? I come from a 'fat family', she doesn't. We're both almost 30, if that matters. That leads me to believe that genetics do play a huge part here, contrary to what's often being parroted in the press. Is that possible? Does anyone have any experience with this?

FWIW when I was eating 1800-2000kcal a day my BMI was 30. I was eating far too much. Now I only eat 1800kcal when doing heavy exercise. Usually I eat 1400kcal a day and maintain my weight comfortably.

Also agree that 2000 for the average woman is ridiculous - I am below average height and quite slim yes, but I also do about 3 to 4 hours of physical activity a day (walking, yoga, weights, running, hiit etc) and I would gain weight eating 2000 cals a day. I maintain on about 1700.

2000kcal per day IS excessive for the average woman, especially if sedentary. I am 5ft4 and 60kg. If I ate 2000kcal a day, I would be very fat very very quickly

The average woman is taller and heavier than that, and probably not sedentary, so while you would gain on that calorie intake, because you are smaller, lighter and less active, if you're saying you're sedentary, a woman of average height, weight and activity levels wouldn't.

I'm 5'7, about 12 stone and not particularly active - average about 8000 steps a day and one yoga class a week. My TDEE is around 2100-2200 so would lose on 2000 cals per day. The reason I'm a bit overweight is because sometimes I eat considerably more than that, plus like a drink.

My sedentary TDEE is 1400 calories. I’d gain weight quickly at 2000, over a pound a week, a stone in 4 months, 3 whole stone a year.

2000 isn't too much for A LOT of women... It comes down to tdee, there are plenty of women who maintain their weight on 2000 calories. If you're sedentary then it's usually too high though. It's different for every person based off activity level, height etc

Is it the main factor? I don’t think so. ( the examples of rationing etc are extreme and not helpful- of course if you are literally starving you will lose weight) Does it play a part, I’m pretty sure it is a factor. Eat less than you use and you will lose weight of course but definitely think some people have to have a bigger deficit and work harder to loose it that others. As others have said probably due to different people’s bodies responding differently to different diets: food types etc

I going to drop my calories to 1000 a day.
I should lose weight
One question though, assuming I’m overeating why don’t I put weight on? I’ve been this weight for around 10 years ( except when pg -see above)

There is evidence that gut colonisation by methanogenic archea, specifically M.Smithii, is linked to obesity. Archea are bit like bacteria, but are older and simpler types of organism.

People with these microbes are able to harvest more calories from food than others, by increasing the capacity of polysaccharide-eating bacteria to digest polyfructose-containing glycans.

Colonisation of the gut by M. Smithii has been linked to dairy consumption in childhood.

It has also been hypothesised that some individuals are more prone to this colonisation than others, due to a genetic difference that confers protection during times of famine and starvation, making those individuals more likely to survive and therefore bear/rear offspring. There does seem to be some evidence for this in that people of descent from certain areas e.g. East Africa, are more likely to have methanogenic colonisation.

Methanogenic overgrowth is also linked to IBS-C, as methan slows gut motility and good moves through the body more slowly. This also increases the time available for caloric harvest.

If you are interested in this, google the work of Drs Mark Pimentel, Ruchi Mathur and Ali Rezaie of Cedars-Sinai in LA.

The higher your weight, the higher your TDEE. So whilst you're still overeating (ie eating more calories that you need to maintain a Healthy weight), you're eating enough to maintain your current weight.

Please don't drop your calories to 1000, it's too low and isn't recommended, nobody should be going under 1200 really and even that is only usually suitable for a short and sedentary woman. If you consume too little calories it isn't sustainable and it's common for weight to come back on quickly after stopping (because you really can't eat 1000 forever)

Indeed cava. Lots of overweight people blame their metabolism for their weight, but the fact is that they will actually be burning a lot of calories just keeping their heavier body alive.

For example, a sedentary 20 stone, 40 YO, 5'6 woman has a TDEE of 2348 calories per day and she'd burn just about 2000 calories a day even if she never got out of bed.

I agree with you OP. I eat the same, if not more (and certainly more in terms of sweets and chocolates) than several of my friends but have always stayed a size 8-10 whilst some of them are a bit bigger.

I tend to think people have a settling weight that their body naturally wants to gravitate towards, and it takes effort and discipline for people whose settling weight is heavier to keep that in check.

I think my body is not as digestively efficient as theirs - I am presumably getting rid of calories that their bodies are retaining? On a dessert island they would be fine and I would die!

Oooo, here's something I just found that might be interesting:

According to the New York Times, yesterday scientists published the results of a study that found that the bacteria living inside the digestive systems of thin people may actually be keeping them thin — and vice versa.

The experiment sounds convoluted, but the results are fascinating: scientists extracted stomach bacteria from human twins where one was fat and the other thin. The then took that bacteria and injected it into different groups of mice that were raised in a sterile environment and thus didn't have any variance in their own stomach bacteria. The mice with the "fat" bacteria actually grew up to have significantly more body fat than those fed the "thin" bacteria, despite being fed identical diets to the mice whose systems contained "thin" bacteria. But wait; there's more! After the mice were combined into a single cage and began eating each other's droppings (again, gross), the "thin" bacteria overtook the "fat" bacteria and the fat mice lost weight.

The NHS UK Newcastle study put patients on 800 and their diabetes disappeared - actually just checking it was 600 www.diabetes.co.uk/diet/newcastle-study-600-calorie-diet.html however that was under doctors' supervision and for people obese with diabetes.

I agree 1200 is a wise level not 1000 but 1000 is not likely to kill the average British woman. 1200 was the traditional Weight Waters level too

@TheStarryNight that is so interesting!
Our bowels have a much wider function than just digesting our food. I think there’s also a link to good gut flora and a healthy immune system, which is why some people overcome viral infections better.

Thank you, that’s all very interesting
I will try for 1500 to start with, although when I did MFP I set it for that it said I wasnt eating enough (lost nothing at all)
Worth a try, I’m walking further at the moment - average of 2 hours a day and it’s making no difference, except to the arthritis in my hip and knees!!
I’m not making excuses, I don’t think it’s any more complicated than eating too much but also I genuinely don’t think I eat a lot - but my Larry arse says otherwise!

Lardy, no idea who Larry is

facepalm Ye gods, the misconceptions...

Set point is not a thing. No, you do not have a set weight.

Person A goes on a diet, loses weight, gets to their target weight - Yay, diet done. Goes back to their previous eating habits, gains all the weight back, goes back to their starting weight.

Person B goes on a diet, loses weight, gets to their target weight. Yay, diet done. They then carry on consuming enough calories to maintain their new weight, but do not go back to their precious eating habits. They remain at their new weight (for as long as they eat enough to maintain it and no more).

Here. No such thing as a set point.

My friend refers to the whole thing (I.e. calorie burning) as “cake in, cake out”

cava so why does person A not go over their previous higher weight?
Why when I lost 2 stone through HG did I go back to more or less my precise Pre pg weight and not over when I started eating the same amount again?

I think another factor is that people greatly underestimate how much of a particular food group they're eating. It's all well and good saying 'I only eat some pasta and salad for lunch/dinner however, a portion of pasta is 200calories...but a portion is 66 strands of spaghetti. Most people eat way more than this, not counting the sauce, meat and dressing. Repeat this with rice and potatoes and excess galories abound.

I'd advise calorie counters to either weigh their meals or measure using cups to get an average idea of portions.

I'm not overweight or obese but there are certain medications that make people gain loads of weight despite what they eat. I was once offered one as an anti-depressant and refused it because it's very commonly associated with significant weight gain.

I haven't had time to read through the entire thread—yet. I did ask my friend about her morning exercise though. Yes, it's 15 minutes. Apparently though, those 15 minutes are 'uphill sprints followed by slow jogging, rinse and repeat'. I'm thinking that's slightly more intense than 150kcals?

I don't snack because I have this obsession with brushing my teeth immediately after eating anything that requires chewing and it's too much effort to do that throughout the day. I do, however, have 2 coffees with cream twice per day while her drink-of-choice is protein shakes. Our meal prep food is also very protein heavy (it's always chicken breast or salmon, all baked). Does protein contribute to weight gain though? I thought it was always carbs and sugar that were the 'culprits'.

TDEE, hopping.

Your coffees with cream are empty calories... cream in coffee is... calorie dense to say the least.

Her protein shakes will be high in calories, but they will aid muscle growth. Muscle takes a lot of energy to grow and maintain.

'Empty calories' don't cause weight gain.... an excess of calories causes weight gain.