566293 Tue Oct 21 08:12:30 -0700 2008 10 29 Not About Food 0 4118282 Today in an online newsweek article.... "Do some people overeat because they find eating more pleasurable or gratifying than others? Logically, that makes a lot of sense—it's a time-tested principle of psychology: if a behavior feels good, we'll keep doing it. But a new study published today in the journal Science adds to a growing body of research suggesting the opposite: that women who derive less pleasure from eating may eat more to compensate, putting them at higher risk for weight gain and obesity." find the whole article here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164197?GT1=43001 I think there is some truth to this. I always say I loooove to eat and people look at me like I am crazy b/c I am thin. Be it good genes or not, I am usually satisfied by a reasonable or small portion of something. Do you think this study holds any weight? (pun intended) Tue Oct 21 08:12:30 -0700 2008 220217 shadysider023 1 4118418 That matches my experience. I love to eat and to cook too. I take small portions, but I eat so slowly that I am always last to finish. I really try to savor the food and feel very uncomfortable when I overeat, even by a little. It may be that you savor the food so much that a small portion is satisfying. But if it wasn't satisfying, then eating more and more of it would be the law of diminishing returns, making a vicious cycle. FWIW, I am a few pounds more than thin, but fortunately not too many. Tue Oct 21 08:58:16 -0700 2008 4118282 13445 Louise 1 4118642 Nope. Love to eat, and am thin only because I exercise like crazy and fight like heck my desire to overeat. I have always wished I were one of those people who could be satisfied with just a small portion of their favorite foods, or who eats delicious chocolate and says it's "too rich" to have more than a bite or two. But alas, it is not meant to be. Tue Oct 21 10:15:54 -0700 2008 4118282 23389 charmedgirl 1 4118658 Eating was always my favorite activity when I was a kid, and stayed high on the list even after I'd discovered a few others ;-) Problem was, back then I could make three or four good passes at the buffet or the church potluck table without gaining a pound, a characteristic that stayed with me until my early 30s...and then all of a sudden that changed, though my habits didn't. And now here I am, getting closer to 70, and it seems I can't have so much as an extra helping of peas without seeing it on the scale the next morning! So I do try to keep my portion sizes down and my helpings single, and stop dwelling on the days when a whole rotisserie chicken and a giant order of potato wedges was a normal supper... but it's hard. Tue Oct 21 10:19:28 -0700 2008 4118282 11478 Will Owen 1 4118734 Ha. I identify with will owen, except that I'm starting to feel the effects of eating whatever I want, in whatever amount I want, in my late 20s. Unfortunately, I'm pretty terrible at restricting what I put in my mouth, but at least I'm making more of a concerted effort to go on long runs with my personal trainer (i.e. my dog). I find that I'm most likely to overeat when I'm not paying attention at all to what I'm eating: i.e. I'm at my desk, staring at my computer screen, with a bowl full of something or another right next to me. I don't really eat much junk food on a normal basis (not because I have any self control, but because I don't usually crave it), but if you've ever eaten several lbs of grapes in one sitting, you know that can be a problem. Esp. if you wash it down with a few cups of coffee. =) Anyway, the Newsweek study is consistent with those that find that people who don't experience tastes very intensely tend to eat more than so-called "supertasters". But it's not clear to me which direction the causation runs: do obese women not gain as much enjoyment from food because they are obese (feelings of guilt may override feelings of pleasure, if your body doesn't need food, it may not experience as much pleasure, etc...), or do they become obese because they are genetically predispositioned to not experience joy while eating? Tue Oct 21 10:44:45 -0700 2008 4118282 64215 cimui 1 4118861 I think we need to separate two concepts here. One is our conscious desires and emotions. The other is the brain's response to pleasurable activity. I think the study suggests that people who overeat do so because they have less activity on fMRI in the part of the brain that responds to a pleasurable food experience (dorsal striatum). I don't believe they are suggesting that people who overeat find eating less or more pleasurable than others. This emotional/conscious response to eating is not the same thing as how our brains respond to dopamine release. So trying to validate the results of this study by asking Chowhounders if they find eating pleasurable or not, and seeing if they are obese or not, is beside the point. I'm guessing you'll find a majority of Chowhounders will say they find eating very pleasurable, and I'm also guessing you'll find a mix of obese and regular sized and thin people. But does this validate the study results? Nope, it's just an interesting discussion (in itself a fine thing). To validate this study, you'd have to take a bunch of Chowhounders, classify them as obese or not obese, and hypothesize that when you feed them something yummy like a milkshake, the obese ones will show less activity on the dorsal striatum. Then you'll have to fMRI everyone, and see if the results match the hypothesis. Well I'm game! Sign me up. I am borderline in the obesity department, having a BMI of about 25 (fluctuates up to 27), although I consider myself pretty fit (usually), exercising a fair amount. It would be interesting to see if my dorsal striatum shows a moderate amount of activity. I'm ready for my milkshake. Hmm. Wonder if the milkshake was any good. What if they served a crappy milkshake, and in fact the experience was not at all pleasurable for those who like good food? Could it be that the obese patients in fact were more discerning, and that is why the pleasure centers of the brain were not responding as much in this patient population? So many confounders! I really should write a letter to the editor of the journal. Tue Oct 21 11:19:27 -0700 2008 4118282 89969 moh 2 4119784 I read that article too and I didn't even consider that the milkshake might have been crappy moh. Your post made a lot of sense. For my own experience, I used to work at a holiday inn over the dinner shift and at that time the staff was allowed a free dinner as long as we picked something fairly inexpensive. The dinners varied greatly in quality and I noticed that if I got a crappy dinner I was done for the night. I'd eat a little bit of it and then not want anything else. The bad food would kill my appetite. Ah, but if the dinner was really good I would eat it all and want snacks and dessert too. Dunno if lthis means anything, probably not but just saying. Tue Oct 21 17:09:35 -0700 2008 4118861 184593 givemecarbs 1 4119149 Not sure about that new study's results, but here's my two cents. If I overeat, it's for one of two reasons: There is too much food in front of me and I haven't quite hit the point where I realized I'm full so I keep eating it (time lapse of digestion) or... I'm procrastinating on something so I "go get a snack". Tue Oct 21 12:58:08 -0700 2008 4118282 112406 Chew on That 1 4119859 There are probably other hypotheses that need to be examined. One would be: "Measured 'pleasure' for food, drugs, or alcohol would probably be less for addicts in the experiments simply because more of a threashold needs to be achieved for more addicted persons". Obvious: a bit of cocaine may give pleasure to one who uses now and then; while great amounts are needed for an addict. Tue Oct 21 17:46:38 -0700 2008 4118282 36661 Sam Fujisaka 1 4120347 Does this theory hold weight? Absolutely! But so does every other flavor-of-the-month theory that comes along. And they come along regularly. First and foremost on the weight battlefront is our present day sedentary life style. If you look around, there are no fat athletes. Well, except for wrestlers, sumo and others. And maybe a few football players and weight lifters. But those guys eat thousands and thousands of calories a day to keep their weight up. In today's world, the goal seems to be to enable our species to shed our legs and shorten our arms. How many here have their personal cell phones on their bodies during all waking hours so you don't have to walk a couple of feet to pick up a land line phone? Then there is genetics. For example, the Mojave Indians of North America are short of stature and obese. Everyone! And possibly carry the world's highest rate of diabetes. They were the center of a diabetes research project a dacade or three ago. And then there is hormonal obesity. NO ONE on the planet has a good handle on that! I was hyperthyroid for years, didn't know about it but gained weight by watching food commercials, but was never tested because "normal" people lose weight when hyperthyroid. So they removed my thyroid, I am now seriously hypothyroid, apparently am thyroid hormone resistant, yet I continue to spontaneously lose weight while eating any damned thing my heart desires at any time of day! Go figure! Endocrinologists of today are working in the dark. There is also a theory that obese people do not have as acute a sense of taste as skinny people. Undoubtedly some of them around. Let's not overlook the theory that overweight people have an exquisite sense of taste, with a very high satiety point. Poor babies! Then there's the semi-Freudian theory that food replaces repressed sexual desire. In today's world? Ha! Also with a Freudian bent is the theory that overeating is the adult version of thumb sucking. Good theory, except there are a lot of fat people who never sucked their thumbs. I suspect there are as many scientific reasons for obesity as there are obese people. But I vote for the theory our species is trying to shed our legs. Makes sense! Now, if those damnded track and field people would just stop throwing a raft in the gene pool... Tue Oct 21 22:29:38 -0700 2008 4118282 112096 Caroline1 1 4122382 My appestat was damaged by mercury poisoning, indirectly. Mercury damages the body's ability to produce digestive enzymes and to properly use nutrients from food. I was down to 82 lbs (5'6", natural weight at the time 115-120 lbs, no eating disorder) at the worst of my mercury poisoning. My body is still adjusting to being able to use the nutrients I take in as I rid my body of mercury and heal. My husband is in charge of moderation. Wed Oct 22 17:04:49 -0700 2008 4118282 169792 lgss