Obesity may be caused by a common virus!

[Winston Blake]

Thanks for the clarification, but my point remains that we don't have enough information to say that this virus doesn't affect the process of converting energy to fat. At this stage, for all we know, it may cause the body to misjudge how much received energy is 'unused', mistakenly starting the energy-storing process.

Why should I assume such a thing when there's no evidence it's the case? Because it might be? Did you know that you might become a millionaire if you follow one of those pyramid schemes out there? We don't have enough information to rule out the possibility, yes. But we don't have the information to rule it as a realistic possibility either. It'd just be a wild guess.

Maybe you haven't been paying much attention, but Darth Raptor claimed that it was impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without an excess of input energy (to the point of claiming it would violate the laws of physics). I pointed out a mechanism which would make it possible. Whether or not that's true for this particular piece of research doesn't change the fact that Darth Raptor's claim is flawed.

[kinnison]

It's my understanding that human biology is the culprit. Humans evolved in a world where food wasn't always available 24/7, and thus when faced with an abundant food supply, the human body will store as much as possible to survive any starving periods. Some people store this energy faster and more readily than others. In a natural world this would be a handy survival trait. In our artificial one, it causes obsesity.

Let's take that one a little further. The conclusion is that one of the causes of being fat is dieting, but I'll set out the chain.

Many, perhaps most, people who want to lose weight think of it as "going on a diet" not a long-term lifestyle change. And most of those are in a hurry, too.

Go on a strict diet (without increasing exercise levels) and you lose weight. Fine. What isn't fine is that some of what you lose is muscle - and the faster it's lost, the higher the proportion. Nobody can keep on a boring "slimming diet" for ever - so eventually the individual starts eating as before (too much) and starts putting weight on - quite possibly to a higher level than before, as there is less muscle tissue to burn it off (muscle takes energy to keep, even when not exercising).

So after maybe 6 months on a diet and 6 months afterward on their normal diet, the person is possibly heavier and certainly has higher bodyfat than before - and it's fat percentage that matters, not weight. (Arnold Schwarzenegger's BMI is probably quite high - is he fat?)

Conclusion; being fat is bad, "yo-yo" dieting is worse.

[ray245]

Is it that hard for Americans to exercise? Even if you eat quite a lot, if you just exercise, you WON’T get fat. Too fat .

To all those people who tried to give excuses for being fat, the truth is you are simply lazy to exercise yourself or control yourself. Do not ask for more evidence to defend your right of being fat.

Being Fat is bad for your health. Period.

How hard is it to understand those words? Sign...liberty of own ideas indeed...

Being fat is your own choice, if you get laughed by others; it's your own fault in the first place.

[Dooey Jo]

Is it true that some very obese people are actually addicted to eating? Because if so, telling them to eat right and exercise is probably bound to be about as productive as telling a heroinist to quit taking dope, or telling a clinically depressed person to cheer up. For some, a small minority, that may work, but most people would need help way beyond that.

[Turin]

Thanks for the clarification, but my point remains that we don't have enough information to say that this virus doesn't affect the process of converting energy to fat. At this stage, for all we know, it may cause the body to misjudge how much received energy is 'unused', mistakenly starting the energy-storing process.

Why should I assume such a thing when there's no evidence it's the case? Because it might be? Did you know that you might become a millionaire if you follow one of those pyramid schemes out there? We don't have enough information to rule out the possibility, yes. But we don't have the information to rule it as a realistic possibility either. It'd just be a wild guess.

Maybe you haven't been paying much attention, but Darth Raptor claimed that it was impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without an excess of input energy (to the point of claiming it would violate the laws of physics). I pointed out a mechanism which would make it possible. Whether or not that's true for this particular piece of research doesn't change the fact that Darth Raptor's claim is flawed.

Nonsense. If your claimed mechanism was actually true, the infected person would start experiencing malnutrition, as they would be storing energy when they shouldn't be. Or they would have to start eating a lot more. In other words, you would still need an excess of input energy for a person to gain mass.

[drachefly]

Read Winston Blake's first post in this thread. He's way ahead of you.

[Turin]

Read Winston Blake's first post in this thread. He's way ahead of you.

Except that he's drawing false conclusions. Read this post:

Maybe you haven't been paying much attention, but Darth Raptor claimed that it was impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without an excess of input energy (to the point of claiming it would violate the laws of physics). I pointed out a mechanism which would make it possible.

Not to repeat myself, but Winston's "mechanism" doesn't make it possible for mass to appear magically on a body without an excess of input energy. His original post only makes this position seem that more nonsensical. No matter how you slice it, you still need excess energy to have mass increase.

[drachefly]

The source of excess energy is obvious, and he stated it. Yes. WB is in fact including excess energy, and always has. Fan of straw, much?

So, how about you additionally go back and read Darth Raptor's post, and then reread Winston Blake's with that post in mind, and see what WB supplied that DR was missing.

Done?

Let's see how you did: The virus is perfectly capable of fitting in to the chain of events that DR stated, such that one cannot simply "Deal. With. It."
WB said how.

[Turin]

The source of excess energy is obvious, and he stated it. Yes. WB is in fact including excess energy, and always has. Fan of straw, much?

Fuck off, dumbass. Clearly it is you who have not been paying attention. Winston mentions it in the first post, but then excludes it from his mechanism in the post I responded to. Here's the original post in question.

Attention: America
Regarding: Your Fat Ass

Regardless of what triggers the development of adipose tissue, pursuant to the Laws of Thermodynamics, it takes energy to fill those fat cells. Obesity is caused by consuming more calories than you use. Deal. With. It.

I don't get it, that seems like a post hoc fallacy to me. What if this virus causes the growth of fat cells in the first place, forcibly draining energy (in accordance with your citation of thermodynamics)? Then a person would need to eat more to make up for the lost energy.

Emphasis mine. Followed by:

Maybe you haven't been paying much attention, but Darth Raptor claimed that it was impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without an excess of input energy (to the point of claiming it would violate the laws of physics). I pointed out a mechanism which would make it possible.

Again, emphasis mine. This is the post I responded to, and in this post Winston Blake is absolutely, 100% wrong. It is impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without excess energy input. No fucking magical mechanism allows you to get around the Laws of Thermodynamics. Saying "well the virus leads to the fat cell growth" doesn't mean shit unless you include the excess energy.

A somewhat generous reading of both posts together might say that Winston Blake simply misspoke in the last post, but maybe I'm just feeling cranky today... having the peanut gallery coming and going "LOLZ strawman!" doesn't help.

[drachefly]

I'd say that yes, you are being very cranky. Get some coffee, or whatever you need.

I didn't even see what he said as wrong; I just read it as

I pointed out a mechanism which would make ('weight gain', or perhaps 'additional input energy due to the virus') possible.

While you decided he meant that the conservation of energy was bullshit.

Even when I'm cranky, I tend to assume people don't mean that level of idiocy unless I'm forced to.

[Turin]

I'd say that yes, you are being very cranky. Get some coffee, or whatever you need.

I didn't even see what he said as wrong; I just read it as

I pointed out a mechanism which would make ('weight gain', or perhaps 'additional input energy due to the virus') possible.

While you decided he meant that the conservation of energy was bullshit.

Even when I'm cranky, I tend to assume people don't mean that level of idiocy unless I'm forced to.

Considering that this particular subject (obesity) is one in which otherwise intelligent people have a strange tendency to want to waive belief in the Laws of Thermodynamics, I didn't think I was being that unfair. And when someone says "it would be possible" right after a sentence that says something is "impossible", I tend to assume, as a native English speaker, that the 2 clauses are related.

In any event, I'm sure Winston Blake was perfectly capable of defending or clarifying his own point. I promise to chill out if you do.

[drachefly]

We are chilled, then.

[Winston Blake]

Maybe you haven't been paying much attention, but Darth Raptor claimed that it was impossible for this virus to cause weight gain without an excess of input energy (to the point of claiming it would violate the laws of physics). I pointed out a mechanism which would make it possible. Whether or not that's true for this particular piece of research doesn't change the fact that Darth Raptor's claim is flawed.

Nonsense. If your claimed mechanism was actually true, the infected person would start experiencing malnutrition, as they would be storing energy when they shouldn't be. Or they would have to start eating a lot more. In other words, you would still need an excess of input energy for a person to gain mass.

I think the problem is different interpretations of 'excess', which to be honest I didn't actually define. You see, I was considering the case where a person eats more than they actually need to sustain themselves as an excess energy input. I think you're looking at it thermodynamically rather than nutritionally - considering a human to be a black box where excess input energy means the input is greater than the output (which is perfectly reasonable).

Your scenario where a person begins to experience malnutrition is an undersupply of energy by my definition, but a balanced input by yours. Then when a person eats more to compensate, they return to a state without excess input by my definition, but with an excess by yours.

Darth Raptor's point was that fat people wouldn't be fat if they weren't reprehensible gluttons who overeat, i.e. take more energy than they actually need. What I was trying to point out is that a person could eat no more than necessary (to avoid malnutrition), yet still gain weight.

Darth Raptor's scenario is that an obese person with the virus grows more fat cells, but these remain empty. The person stupidly eats more than they need to, causing energy storage and hence weight gain. My scenario is the opposite (and the exact same as the scenario you outlined above) - the virus causes energy storage, causing a person to eat more. The end result is the same - a fat person who eats a lot. The difference is that it's not a because of weak-willed gluttony in our scenario.

[Turin]

I think the problem is different interpretations of 'excess', which to be honest I didn't actually define. You see, I was considering the case where a person eats more than they actually need to sustain themselves as an excess energy input. I think you're looking at it thermodynamically rather than nutritionally - considering a human to be a black box where excess input energy means the input is greater than the output (which is perfectly reasonable).

Fair enough, although seeing as Darth Raptor's original point was from a thermodynamic perspective, you can probably see why that's where I focused.

My scenario is the opposite (and the exact same as the scenario you outlined above) - the virus causes energy storage, causing a person to eat more. The end result is the same - a fat person who eats a lot. The difference is that it's not a because of weak-willed gluttony in our scenario.

And the problem with that (as I think Raptor mentioned) is that we don't actually have any evidence that the virus causes overeating as well. You're adding a mechanism that isn't necessary to explain the result. Not parsimonious.

[drachefly]

What explains the rat results, then? The virus clearly explains that. It's not like someone just up and said, "Gee, what if obesity is caused by a virus?" They actually did some work on this.

[Turin]

What explains the rat results, then? The virus clearly explains that. It's not like someone just up and said, "Gee, what if obesity is caused by a virus?" They actually did some work on this.

The article barely mentions the rat studies except in passing, so we don't know from this article what the hell the rat studies looked at specifically. You're going to have to excuse the hell out of me if I don't take at face value a passing mention in a phone interview with the researcher, reported second hand through the notoriously poor "science news" of Reuters/AP/etc.

However, I've generously done the research for you, and found a paper where the rat experiments were described in detail.

In rat primary adipocytes, Ad-36 reduced leptin release by about 40% in presence of 0.48 (P<0.01) or 1.6 nM insulin (P<0.05) and increased glucose uptake by 93% (P<0.001) or 18% (P<0.05) in presence of 0 or 0.48 nM insulin, respectively.

In other words, yes, the virus does in fact increase glucose uptake into the fat cells. I concede the point.

It would have been nice if someone making a claim (for which the original article had insufficient information) actually did the research to back themselves up, but apparently I'm feeling kind today. Your welcome.

[drachefly]

Well, no shit. The only two ways that wouldn't be the case, as per conservation of mass and energy, is if the researcher or writer was actually lying. It's hard to misrepresent 'rats on this virus gained weight more than controls'.

[Turin]

Well, no shit. The only two ways that wouldn't be the case, as per conservation of mass and energy, is if the researcher or writer was actually lying.

Or if the controls were lousy. Or if the reporter was just wrong. <gasp!> Gee willikers, Jimmy, maybe if someone is making a claim they should provide more information!?

It's hard to misrepresent 'rats on this virus gained weight more than controls'.

Nice misquote.

The virus adenovirus-36 or Ad-36, caused animals to pack on the pounds in lab experiments. "These animals accumulated a lot of fat," Dhurandhar said in a telephone interview.

And as per my previous post, this particular subject is one in which science is constantly misrepresented by the press. How often do we hear "such-and-such food makes you fat, news at 11!"? From this article, we don't have a damn clue what the researcher was actually doing with the rats, much less enough evidence to make sweeping claims about absorption of nutrients.

All I wanted was some actual evidence beyond a passing mention of a rat study. Is that too much to ask? Silly me, I thought I was posting on SDN, where people are expected to provide some evidence of their claims.

[Darth Wong]

What explains the rat results, then? The virus clearly explains that. It's not like someone just up and said, "Gee, what if obesity is caused by a virus?" They actually did some work on this.

The rat results confirm the well-known fact that some specimens gain weight more easily than others, and that a virus can influence these variations.

It still doesn't necessarily mean the animal would get fat if it was receiving only enough calories to meet its metabolic needs.

[drachefly]

Darth Raptor made the argument that viruses could not cause obesity, by CoE. This is wrong, due to the mechanism Winston Blake described up front.

I think we can all agree on this? Because everything after that is unnecessary if we do.

[Zixinus]

Darth Raptor made the argument that viruses could not cause obesity, by CoE. This is wrong, due to the mechanism Winston Blake described up front.

What if it only HELPS it and not cause it?

[drachefly]

Well, sure. Maybe it just helps. Doesn't change the point that no law of physics prevents them from having any portion of the responsibility ranging from 0 to 100%.

[Turin]

Darth Raptor made the argument that viruses could not cause obesity, by CoE. This is wrong, due to the mechanism Winston Blake described up front.

I think we can all agree on this? Because everything after that is unnecessary if we do.

Apparently everyone but you are on board here. Your first statement is a big strawman of Darth Raptor's actual statements:

Regardless of what triggers the development of adipose tissue, pursuant to the Laws of Thermodynamics, it takes energy to fill those fat cells. Obesity is caused by consuming more calories than you use. Deal. With. It.

and then

The point is, this is not the Progenator Virus. It cannot pull free matter and energy out of the ether. If a person has fat in them, the odds are very good it got in through their mouth.

Both of these statements are still true, regardless of what mechanisms are involved. DR did not say the laws of thermodynamics prevented a virus from causing obesity, he's said that regardless of what mechanisms are involved, you still need input > output for obesity to occur. In fact, he used an example of his own "slow metabolism" to reinforce the point.

Winston Blake has made a good argument (and the evidence supports it) behind a mechanism that alters the efficiency of the process. But nothing changes that basic thermodynamic problem = mass comes from input energy. The two of them might be talking past each other (as I was somewhat until WB straightened me out on details), but even WB isn't disagreeing with that basic statement. Why are you?

[drachefly]

And that fits so well with the first response to this very topic which seems to be ridiculing the whole concept raised by the topic:

Attention: America
Regarding: Your Fat Ass

Regardless of what triggers the development of adipose tissue, pursuant to the Laws of Thermodynamics, it takes energy to fill those fat cells. Obesity is caused by consuming more calories than you use. Deal. With. It.

[drachefly]

Look, this is stupid. We all agree now on all issues of substance. If someone wants to talk about the actual original article, and I have anything to say, great, I'll say it. Anything else on this sidetrack isn't going to get a response.

You can have your victory dance and whatever your personal rites are, if you want: I was hideously, absolutely, wrong, about everything Darth Raptor said. He was absolutely right in every case, and so were you, Turin. And while we're at it, so was Winston.
Is this damn horse dead yet, or do I need to give it a few more kicks?