Obesity

Obesity is 'bigger cause of breast cancer than smoking or drinking'
By SOPHIE BORLAND
Last updated at 9:52 AM on 20th July 2011


Obesity is the biggest avoidable cause of breast cancer, a study claims.
Women who are dangerously overweight are at a far higher risk even than those who drink heavily or smoke.

Experts have long known that the excesses of a modern, unhealthy lifestyle can dramatically increase the likelihood of breast cancer.

But now scientists have shown that obese women have far higher levels of cancer-triggering hormones than those who smoke or drink to excess.

You leech off the taxpayers in your STATE job...Did you forget who puts food on your table, MR. STATE EMPLOYEE?
Did you neglect to notice that the taxpayers bought the chair you plop your ample ass into every morning?

Calories in calories out, easier for some , harder for others. When it comes to obesity I have no sympathy.

Every year my pants get another size smaller, but I just stay the same weight. (Who's got the reference?)

Just noticed this study published online ahead of print in the journal Drug Testing and Analytics, which suggests that both performance-enhancing drugs and hard training “may alter the expression of specific genes involved in muscle and bone metabolism by epigenetic mechanisms, such as DNA methylation and histone modifications.” Cool, huh? This is why the “genetics versus training” debate is so irreducibly complicated: training can effectively change your genetics.

The SciAm article focuses on evidence that overweight mothers may pass the tendency to be overweight on to their children. What’s crucial is that this “inherited” trait isn’t encoded in DNA — instead, it’s how the DNA’s instructions are carried out that is altered. For example, there’s preliminary evidence that children born to an overweight mother before she undergoes gastric bypass surgery are more likely to become overweight when they grow up than their siblings born after the surgery [EDIT: see this AP story or this study for details]. If this was a simple genetic inheritance (i.e. through DNA), the surgery wouldn’t make any difference to inherited traits. Instead, it appears to be an epigenetic phenomenon.

If you DID get in trouble for viewing photo's...

something tells me that you'd much rather it be of a more attractive woman...

LOL!!!...

For example, there’s preliminary evidence that children born to an overweight mother before she undergoes gastric bypass surgery are more likely to become overweight when they grow up than their siblings born after the surgery [EDIT: see this AP story or this study for details]. If this was a simple genetic inheritance (i.e. through DNA), the surgery wouldn’t make any difference to inherited traits. Instead, it appears to be an epigenetic phenomenon.

calories in, calories out

I have two other close friends who are hot-shot chefs in Providence, RI. Their jobs are literally to prepare food, and taste, and eat, etc. They have to eat and come up with new ideas and dishes all the time. But they both are thin. Why?

When my friends down a Guinness/Murphy's that has more calories than the donut I'm stuffing into my face, we're not actually craving nutrition, we're craving a different kind of satisfaction.

It frustrates me that "calories in, calories out" comes across as nasty instead of factual to people.

Actually, this is a misconception. Guinness Draught is one of the lightest beers out there by density and by calories; it's caloric content is equal to that of most light beers. Notice how it floats on top of an ale in a black & tan. If you're gonna drink beer, that's the way to go. Damn, I think I gotta go find one now!

(and it's about half the calories of most doughnuts)

Many of us eat when we’re not truly, physically hungry. We often munch because the sight and smell of food is too tempting to resist – and it just tastes good. Other times we eat because we’re bored, sad, lonely or stressed. And sometimes well-meaning family members and friends pressure us to eat.

However, I do think that we can be trained to be OK with eating less. The whole concept of eating until "full" has baffled me from a dietary standpoint. This was likely never an option for our ancestors, or even today for people in the poorest nations. I think our bodies are equipped to deal with irregular consumption of food and societies idea of 3 regular meals a day (or many smaller meals or whatever the hottest diet of the day dictates) is unnecessary.

As an adult, I really don't feel sympathy for myself if I gain a little, I do know it's my own fault. But there is a lot for people to overcome by what they are surrounded by and I mostly feel for the youngsters, how can they have a chance with the brainwashing marketing they are subjected to? These companies spend huge amounts of money targeting kids/teens because it WORKS. It has far reaching effects that follow someone through the rest of their life. It's unethical, IMO, to market to young with unhealthy food.

You can be ok from a standpoint that you don't collapse and die. That doesn't mean that they didn't have constant hunger pains.

For me, I can ignore the hunger pains. But as I've gotten older, I have found that if I don't keep my calories above a certain level, the number of headaches and migrains (yes, they are very different) I get skyrockets. And unfortunately that calorie level does not appear compatible with a lean, healthy lifestyle.

But as I've gotten older, I have found that if I don't keep my calories above a certain level, the number of headaches and migrains (yes, they are very different) I get skyrockets.

Ethics and Advertising cannot appear in the same space time continuum....and vice versa

The Price institute also says limit fruits and vegies for your children and eat clay for cleansing.