the 'fat' gene?

**Mac** · 14-05-2010, 09:36 AM

Woohoo!! Thanks for that Janeyo! I was bullied about my weight by my big sister for years until she had her kids! She was always really skinny as a child even though she did no exercise at all! I was what you would call a chubby child and did different sports every day. I must admit after my sister had the kids and didn't lose all the fat, I did have a bit of fun getting my own back as by this point I'd lost my extra weight (petty I know). So thanks for the explanation....makes a lot of sense.....

**OllieMartin** · 14-05-2010, 09:44 AM

I think the fat gene must exist.
I'm slim, always have been, I eat HUGE portions (and I do mean HUGE!). Yesterday at work someone was leaving so there were cakes and buns and things; I had 4 within 30 minutes of walking in

People constantly tell me, "Oh you'll get to 30 and your metabolism will change!", but I'm always likened in stature to my Grandfather and one of my Uncles, both of whom have been slim their whole lives. I'm also the youngest and my brother (who also eats a lot, probably more) is far more weighty than me. He has recently given up beer, which he used to drink a lot, and now only drinks vodka. He's lost quite a lot on his 'vodka diet'!

I have got a bit of a tummy at the moment, but that's because I'm on steroids and can't really exercise, but most people wouldn't even call it a tummy, I only notice because I've never had one before

**janeyo** · 14-05-2010, 10:03 AM

4 cakes in 30 mins -

I only have to LOOK at one and siff it never mind eating it!

I want to be Ollie's official dietician lol!

**Capsid** · 14-05-2010, 10:04 AM

There are strains of mice that are fat. Fat is deposited in adipose tissue which are fat cells essentially. Deposition is controlled by the adipose gene. But it's a simple calculation based on your normal metabolic rate and energy consumption and what your calorific intake is. Those with a high metabolic rate burn more calories than those with lower rates and therefore will be predisposed to getting fat especially if they don't exercise or overeat. So I'm afraid the answer is always eat less and exercise more if you want to lose weight.

**Brengirl** · 14-05-2010, 10:42 AM

It just has to be genes. Even the desire to eat lots must come from our origins. Body shape, features and colouring are obvious but in my mind there is no way we can alter the way we were destined to be without scientific intervention.

**OverWyreGrower** · 14-05-2010, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Capsid View Post

Those with a high metabolic rate burn more calories than those with lower rates and therefore will be predisposed to getting fat especially if they don't exercise or overeat. So I'm afraid the answer is always eat less and exercise more if you want to lose weight.

I'd like to dispute this!

I've been dieting and exercising for about 4 months now and haven't actually lost any weight (nor are my clothes looser etc). I've been exercising 5 times a week, for an hour every day (plus 4 miles of dog walking a day, as usual; and various physical jobs inside and out).
I've stopped eating bread, cut other carbs down; don't eat anything processed (ready meals, jars of sauce etc), don't drink and don't eat much sugar.

However, my sister (before her illness) eats like a trooper - loads of sweets, cheese, bread etc, doesn't exercise and struggles to get to 9 stone.

If that's not genetic, I'm not sure what is!!!

**Capsid** · 14-05-2010, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by OverWyreGrower View Post

I'd like to dispute this!

I've been dieting and exercising for about 4 months now and haven't actually lost any weight (nor are my clothes looser etc). I've been exercising 5 times a week, for an hour every day (plus 4 miles of dog walking a day, as usual; and various physical jobs inside and out).
I've stopped eating bread, cut other carbs down; don't eat anything processed (ready meals, jars of sauce etc), don't drink and don't eat much sugar.

However, my sister (before her illness) eats like a trooper - loads of sweets, cheese, bread etc, doesn't exercise and struggles to get to 9 stone.

If that's not genetic, I'm not sure what is!!!

I agree with you. It is genetic, due to the adipose gene. Keep at it and it will make a difference. For fat to come off you have to intake less calories than you are burning through exercise, then the fat deposits are used up to generate heat and energy. If the amount of calories going in is the same as being used then the fat won't be used. Your sister has a higher metabolic rate than you I'm afraid.

di · 14-05-2010, 11:53 AM

Shelley,I can't remember all the science behind it but you need to eat a certain amount of fat to lose weight...could it be that you've cut out too much?
Stick with it Love...even if the weight loss is slow at least you can reassure yourself you're far healthier than before

**Nicos** · 14-05-2010, 11:56 AM

Nah...you've got it all wrong peeps!!!

Thin peeps clearly need worming!!!

**Bramble_killer** · 14-05-2010, 12:30 PM

Sorry all, there is no single fat gene. (trust me)

There are a few number of rare people who have disorders in leptin (the appetite gene) and a few people who have problems with metabolising things (thyroid dysfunction) but most of the time it's just people eating too much and not using up the calories.

for those that are eating lots but not gaining weight, have you seen what you're eating lots of? Or have you checked your portion sizes?

**Brengirl** · 14-05-2010, 12:45 PM

OK. In theory it makes sense but what determines appetite in the first place. I have never been able to overeat. I serve small to medium portions and struggle to eat that. I enjoy food but know when I have had enough

**SarzWix** · 14-05-2010, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Bramble_killer View Post

Sorry all, there is no single fat gene. (trust me)

Why? Are you a geneticist? Capsid has just explained up there ^ that there is a gene that makes a difference... A quick Google turns up all sorts of interesting stuff. This is the first one I came too, but there are tons of others: Adipose gene may be the key to tackle weight

**weekendwellies** · 14-05-2010, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by janeyo View Post

I also think being a second child doesn't help your chances as you probably get fed the same portion size as your elder sibling when you don't actually need the same ammount of calories. We thought of loads of cases in our friends and family where the second child was way bigger than the first and it carried on to adulthood.

My kids are the other way round. The elder one is ever so slightly on the rounded side of slim, whilst the younger one is decidedly skinny. We all have the same sized portions at dinner, but I don't know what they eat during the day, now they are teenagers.
The younger one was a smaller birth weight than the elder one, so don't know if that has anything to do with it. Also, the younger one is growing much taller than the older one.

The younger one is a human dustbin, she eats all sort of stuff, so she tells me, and her friends back her up on this, and they are all jealous that she never seems to put a pound on.

I am constantly having to reassure the older one that she is not fat, and she has recently taken up going to the gym.

.

**Florence Fennel** · 14-05-2010, 12:55 PM

Up to being 40 I could eat pretty much whatever I wanted and stayed a trim, slim, size 12. 40 to 50 I had to start watching what I ate as I noticed a susceptibility to gain weight if I overindulged. Since hitting 50 and beyond, I have to seriously restrict what I eat in order not to gain weight ('fraid I'm mostly losing the battle but hey-ho). Just thought I'd put that in out of interest to illustrate that the body changes with age, well mine does!

Announcement

the 'fat' gene?

the 'fat' gene?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Latest Topics

Recent Blog Posts