Sad to see genetics being invoked for the obesity epidemic , genes haven’t evolved in the very short time this huge problem happened . It panders to pharma and gene editing solutions .. bad move in my view
I too am concerned that the microevolutionary hypothesis could potentially be embraced by industry for financial gains.
However we still propose because we believe it may be correct and have been unable to falsify the hypothesis despite years of trying to.
While I have a similar distrust of pharma, but I do not believe we should allow our concerns for the possibility of immoral behavior of pharma prevent us from exploring a plausible hypothesis.
The evidence for the obesity problem is obvious to anyone who has observed how the Standard American Diet (SAD) - appalling already in the 1950s and by now simply deadly - has forcefully expanded around the world. Sugar consumption is higher than at any time in history, and most people are incentivised to eat too much sugary and poor-quality dairy and wheat products. In North America it is standard practice to add sugar and seed oils to bread. Inflammation and obesity go hand in hand, and that’s not a result of genetic influence, that is altering genetic expression. I would like to know who funds the research done by people like this. It sounds suspiciously like industry whitewashing.
This is nothing more than fact-less intuitive speculation by two individuals who do not understand genetics. Think of a cocktail party where experts discuss a topic they know little about. It might be provocative, entertaining speculation. But fact-checking and evidence are fundamental to science.
A hypothesis, which Dr. Fraiman proclaimed, is only the first step of science. Science depends on the testing of hypotheses. Scientists come to the table with a tested hypothesis. Dr. Fraiman did not.
They presented no facts or published findings. They were confused about some basic terms such as genetics, epigenetics, genes, genotype, phenotype, and inheritance. These terms have infiltrated into everyday vernacular thought. Science is based on evidence-based definitions and clarification of such terms. Recent research and findings have transformed our definitions of genes, phenotypes, and their relationships. Genes and phenotypes are much more distant from each other than we previously thought.
I have dug some articles that they might have quoted. I did this despite their talk and not because of it.
The nature of obesity is complex. Genetics is complex. Science is best when it is based on evidence that is well-developed and verified. The questions and hypotheses must be specific and the focused research provides answers.
Findings can be contradictory. Real scientists would be less confident of their statements.
Dr. Joseph Fraiman, to his credit, pleaded for expert input, but he should have done this before the podcast not during it.
It is hard to understand why an influential professor such as Jay Bhattacharya at a top university could not arrange for a more expert genetic voice in this conversation. It might have led to clarity rather than confusion.
Socrates, Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galen all had theories about life, biology, and atoms. We value them. They made some valuable medical points. But they were largely off the mark. They had no microscopes, telescopes, chemistry, laboratories, or journals.
Dr. Fraiman and Professor Bhattacharya have all these and other tools but did not access them.
Talk is cheap. Professor Bhattacharya is inadvertently providing evidence that economics is the dismal science. He clearly has no understanding of genetics, vaccines, viruses, or mRNA. He came unprepared to this podcast.
The sponsor of Professor Bhattacharya’s podcast is www.alcamielements.com. It markets subscriptions to oral adaptogens. What are adaptogens? I have no idea.
Comment by Steve Blechman: " The Mediterranean diet is low in arachidonic acid and rich in healthy fats such as monounsaturated fats found in extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO), nuts and omega-3 fatty acids from fish, which has been shown to lower the risk of inflammation, heart disease, cancer, diabetes and obesity, and other degenerative diseases." He also noted, "How many people do you know that think white meat is healthier than red meat for the prevention of cardiovascular disease? In fact, white meat might be worse than red meat because of the amount of arachidonic acid in white meat such as poultry (i.e., chicken and turkey)." (web search - Steve Blechman new red meat study)
In my view, this is what caused the global obesity epidemic. " (2023) “Poultry meats, in particular chicken, have high rates of consumption globally. Poultry is the most consumed type of meat in the United States (US), with chicken being the most common type of poultry consumed. The amounts of chicken and total poultry consumed in the US have more than tripled over the last six decades… Limited evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates the consumption of lean unprocessed chicken as a primary dietary protein source has either beneficial or neutral effects on body weight and body composition and risk factors for CVD and T2DM. Apparently, zero randomized controlled feeding trials have specifically assessed the effects of consuming processed chicken/poultry on these health outcomes.” (web search - Poultry consumption and human cardiometabolic health)
Again, as is so often (and increasingly so) the case, the food industry has become more about maximizing profits rather than providing nourishing, health promoting food. This is the nature of a capitalist economy: profit maximization trumps all else. A very good book examining this issue is Michael Pollen's "The Omnivore's Dilemma." It gives the reader a taste (sorry about the bad pun) of how "corrupt" (perhaps "amoral" might be a better adjective) American agribusiness has become with its exclusive focus on profit maximization.
Sad to see genetics being invoked for the obesity epidemic , genes haven’t evolved in the very short time this huge problem happened . It panders to pharma and gene editing solutions .. bad move in my view
I too am concerned that the microevolutionary hypothesis could potentially be embraced by industry for financial gains.
However we still propose because we believe it may be correct and have been unable to falsify the hypothesis despite years of trying to.
While I have a similar distrust of pharma, but I do not believe we should allow our concerns for the possibility of immoral behavior of pharma prevent us from exploring a plausible hypothesis.
Junk foods, processed foods and vaccines all top the list of poisons to the body.
The evidence for the obesity problem is obvious to anyone who has observed how the Standard American Diet (SAD) - appalling already in the 1950s and by now simply deadly - has forcefully expanded around the world. Sugar consumption is higher than at any time in history, and most people are incentivised to eat too much sugary and poor-quality dairy and wheat products. In North America it is standard practice to add sugar and seed oils to bread. Inflammation and obesity go hand in hand, and that’s not a result of genetic influence, that is altering genetic expression. I would like to know who funds the research done by people like this. It sounds suspiciously like industry whitewashing.
This take is laughable at best.
This is nothing more than fact-less intuitive speculation by two individuals who do not understand genetics. Think of a cocktail party where experts discuss a topic they know little about. It might be provocative, entertaining speculation. But fact-checking and evidence are fundamental to science.
A hypothesis, which Dr. Fraiman proclaimed, is only the first step of science. Science depends on the testing of hypotheses. Scientists come to the table with a tested hypothesis. Dr. Fraiman did not.
They presented no facts or published findings. They were confused about some basic terms such as genetics, epigenetics, genes, genotype, phenotype, and inheritance. These terms have infiltrated into everyday vernacular thought. Science is based on evidence-based definitions and clarification of such terms. Recent research and findings have transformed our definitions of genes, phenotypes, and their relationships. Genes and phenotypes are much more distant from each other than we previously thought.
I have dug some articles that they might have quoted. I did this despite their talk and not because of it.
The nature of obesity is complex. Genetics is complex. Science is best when it is based on evidence that is well-developed and verified. The questions and hypotheses must be specific and the focused research provides answers.
Findings can be contradictory. Real scientists would be less confident of their statements.
Dr. Joseph Fraiman, to his credit, pleaded for expert input, but he should have done this before the podcast not during it.
It is hard to understand why an influential professor such as Jay Bhattacharya at a top university could not arrange for a more expert genetic voice in this conversation. It might have led to clarity rather than confusion.
Socrates, Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galen all had theories about life, biology, and atoms. We value them. They made some valuable medical points. But they were largely off the mark. They had no microscopes, telescopes, chemistry, laboratories, or journals.
Dr. Fraiman and Professor Bhattacharya have all these and other tools but did not access them.
Talk is cheap. Professor Bhattacharya is inadvertently providing evidence that economics is the dismal science. He clearly has no understanding of genetics, vaccines, viruses, or mRNA. He came unprepared to this podcast.
The sponsor of Professor Bhattacharya’s podcast is www.alcamielements.com. It markets subscriptions to oral adaptogens. What are adaptogens? I have no idea.
It is my understanding that childhood vaccine adjuvants can cause autoimmune disorders. Can the autoimmune disorder also cause obesity?
Great piece, you two. Inspired this: https://empathy.guru/2024/09/07/the-obesity-pandemic-and-the-balance-between-genetic-and-memetic-war/
Interesting but SO meandering!
The US exported fatness. So the cause of it worldwide should be easily to discover.
does the fact that europe and asia are way less obese despite the same advances in obstetrics not negate this hypothesis?
Comment by Steve Blechman: " The Mediterranean diet is low in arachidonic acid and rich in healthy fats such as monounsaturated fats found in extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO), nuts and omega-3 fatty acids from fish, which has been shown to lower the risk of inflammation, heart disease, cancer, diabetes and obesity, and other degenerative diseases." He also noted, "How many people do you know that think white meat is healthier than red meat for the prevention of cardiovascular disease? In fact, white meat might be worse than red meat because of the amount of arachidonic acid in white meat such as poultry (i.e., chicken and turkey)." (web search - Steve Blechman new red meat study)
In my view, this is what caused the global obesity epidemic. " (2023) “Poultry meats, in particular chicken, have high rates of consumption globally. Poultry is the most consumed type of meat in the United States (US), with chicken being the most common type of poultry consumed. The amounts of chicken and total poultry consumed in the US have more than tripled over the last six decades… Limited evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates the consumption of lean unprocessed chicken as a primary dietary protein source has either beneficial or neutral effects on body weight and body composition and risk factors for CVD and T2DM. Apparently, zero randomized controlled feeding trials have specifically assessed the effects of consuming processed chicken/poultry on these health outcomes.” (web search - Poultry consumption and human cardiometabolic health)
Again, as is so often (and increasingly so) the case, the food industry has become more about maximizing profits rather than providing nourishing, health promoting food. This is the nature of a capitalist economy: profit maximization trumps all else. A very good book examining this issue is Michael Pollen's "The Omnivore's Dilemma." It gives the reader a taste (sorry about the bad pun) of how "corrupt" (perhaps "amoral" might be a better adjective) American agribusiness has become with its exclusive focus on profit maximization.