Is there really an excuse?

In the news today there were two interesting tidbits about health and nutrition that really stood out to me. The first being, Overweight now outnumber under-fed around the world, and the second, A Biological Basis for Being a Couch Potato?


In the first article, Bob Popkin, a professor at the University of North Carolina states: "Obesity is the norm globally and under-nutrition, while still important in a few countries and in targeted populations in many others, is no longer the dominant disease." There are now 1.4 billion people in the world that are overweight, and 800 million that are under-fed. Now don’t get me wrong, I truly am thankful that the rates of global malnutrition are declining, but the fact that so many people are now overweight is really very startling. Obesity brings with it a multitude of other health problems; diabetes, increased risk of cancer, pulmonary and heart problems, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, are just a few. With this increase in global obesity comes another global crisis, perhaps we haven’t seen the full effects of yet, but we will in the coming years, and that’s health care costs. As more and more countries watch their populations go from normal weight to obese, their national costs of health care will skyrocket as these health issues begin to take place.

The Article discusses how China is a perfect example of the rapid increase toward obesity we’re seeing globally. In recent years the diets of the average Chinese citizen has changed from mostly grain based, to increasing amounts of animal products and vegetable oils. The changes in eating habits combined with more automobile use and television, in general a more Western lifestyle, has caused a dramatic increase in the average Chinese waistband. That information coupled with recent studies showing that people of Asian decent are more likely than other races to become diabetic due to dietary intake, is bound to result in serious increase in average Chinese health care, which in turn may cause a huge economic strain on the government.

Popkin goes on to suggest that there should be governmental response to the epidemic, and that the high costs of nutritious foods should be supplemented by the government. Something I’ve thought for a while. It is the responsibility of the government to make sure that the country is safe internally and abroad, and that includes the health of it's citizens. I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat myself now, fast food and processed foods are cheap, organic foods and vegetables are expensive and recently Americans have watched as gas prices and interest rates skyrocketed, while the average salary remains the same, and more and more people are unable to find moderate paying jobs, the government, by allowing big business to process our food the way they do, is veritably forcing it’s citizens to lead unhealthy lifestyles



The second article, I don’t agree with, and bothers me quite a bit. I’ll explain a little bit about it before I dissect it.

The article discusses an experiment where scientists bread two groups of rats, one group was bread to be obese the other to be thin. They then studied these two groups of rats and the study concluded that the lean group of rats where more responsive to a chemical that the brain produces called Orexin A. While the obese rats, were not particularly receptive to the hormone. Orexin A, is a chemical that “stimulates appetite and spontaneous movement such as fidgeting and other minor unconscious movements.” So, in short the thin rats wanted to move more and wanted to eat more, the fat rats wanted to sit around and be slovenly. Thus, the scientists concluded that human beings who are overweight obviously do share the same problem as the fat rats.

This all seems simple enough, but I don’t buy it. One reason is that these rats were not living within their normal environment, they were living in a test lab, that probably gave them a maze or two and a spinning wheel to get on if they wanted to do some mindless activity. And they probably had regular feeding times. In their actual environment, even the most slovenly of rats would have to move regularly, the would have to travel back and forth to scavenge for food, find secure shelter, find a mate, etc. They would be forced to burn more calories in a real life environment. My next point is that if the rats breed toward obesity were not receptive to this hormone than they would not be stimulated to eat as much, considering one of the hormones main attributes is it’s endorsement of appetite. Small appetite = Small food intake.

I also don’t agree with scientists using this study as an excuse for human beings. Rats don’t have food pyramid, and research showing that activity and healthy food are good. Human beings do, and as much as I like to blame the government and big business for our global obesity epidemic, that doesn’t rule out personal responsibility. We know that we need to move more, and a simple walk around the block after meals can help maintain proper aerobic health. Current guidelines recommend about 45 minutes of aerobic activity a day to maintain heart health, and weight maintenance. We know that eating a low fat high-fiber diet is best for us, lab rats generally don’t have any choice in the food they’re given to eat.

And the simple fact is--we are not rats.