Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Why We Regain Weight: The Obesogenic Memory
(upbeat music) - Welcome to Quick News. This is Ted. The news was published on Thursday, November 21st. Today I'm joined by Eric and Kate. Our topic today is a fascinating and somewhat frustrating discovery about how our fat cells might remember being obese. Let's dive right in. So Eric and Kate, what does this idea of obeseogenic memory mean and what are the implications? Obisogenic memory is pretty wild. It basically means that our fat cells have a sort of memory of being obese due to changes in how our genes are expressed. This is what epigenetics is about. It's like the fat cells keep a record and make it easier for us to regain weight after we've lost it. That's why people often have a hard time keeping off the weight long-term. - Right, but it's not just about the cells. It's also about recognizing how challenging it is to change these outcomes when there are systemic issues at play, like genetics, microbiomes, and even social factors. It's like saying, hey, it's not just your willpower that's not working. There's a lot more going on. - Interesting points. So how exactly does epigenetics come into play here? - Well, after you lose weight, your fat cells are still epigenetically set up to be obese. They're basically more responsive to high fat diets, which just makes the whole yo-yo effect worse. Think of it like your body is wired to bounce back to that heavier set point because of the way genes get switched on and off. Genes get-- - But it's also worth noting that these challenges are amplified by things like socioeconomic conditions. If you don't have easy access to nutritious food, no amount of epigenetic knowledge is going to help you. This science just puts a spotlight on all the barriers people face. - Good perspectives. Now let's talk about the role inflammation plays in this memory of obesity. - Inflammation is a big part of it. The study found that genes related to inflammation are more active in formerly obese mice. This means that when they gain weight back, it happens more quickly. This supports previous research linking chronic inflammation and obesity, making the path back to obesity smoother. - And let's not forget. Inflammation is also driven by stress, and stress is rampant in lower socioeconomic groups. - So this study isn't just about what's happening in the cells. It's also about the bigger picture of how stress and hard living conditions layer on-- - Before the study, what did we know about changes in fat cells? - There were signs from previous studies showing that fat cells in obese mice lose their identity which disrupts their normal functions. It's like the cells forget what they're supposed to do even though there's more fat available to work with. This was a major clue indicating something deeper was going on. - Yeah, and we've seen similar patterns in human studies too, especially in people who have had weight loss surgeries. Their fat cells show changes that make it hard to keep the weight off. This is a recurring theme. - All right, let's talk about the human impact of these findings. - For human studies, the evidence isn't as direct since it's difficult to analyze epigenetic changes in frozen fat tissue. So the mouse model gives us clear causality, but applying this to humans involves overcoming these analysis hurdles. - And this reflects larger systemic issues in medical research, like the fact that economically disadvantaged groups are often underrepresented. This means our understanding of obesity in these populations can still have gaps. - Let's shift gears a bit. Let's compare this to the understanding and management of diabetes in the 20th century. What do you think, Eric? - Great comparison. Early views on diabetes were similar, often blaming individuals for their lifestyle choices instead of recognizing genetic components. Over time, research revealed that genetics played a big role, which helped change public perception and improve support structures. - And much like with obesity, diabetes management also missed socioeconomic factors early on. Populations with fewer resources had worse outcomes because routine care and education weren't accessible. The pattern here is strikingly similar. How did public perceptions of diabetes evolve over time? - As research shed light on genetic factors, blame shifted away from personal failure and toward biological predisposition, this shift helped improve public understanding and led to better support and resources for managing the condition. - But even with that knowledge, disparities linger. Socioeconomic challenges persist, leading to unequal access to the care and treatment needed. The same could happen with obesity unless we-- - What can societies learn from the diabetes example to better handle obesity? - Focusing on education about how genetics and environment interact is crucial. Policies need to support not just individual responsibility, but also provide structural support, think accessible healthcare, nutritional education and community programs. - On the flip side, systemic changes are key. We need to improve access to affordable, healthy food and ensure better overall socioeconomic conditions. - Without that, obesity will remain a massive public health issue. - How have treatment strategies evolved for diabetes? And how can we draw parallels to obesity? - Treatments for diabetes evolved from a place of blame to scientifically backed medications and lifestyle modifications, the same approach should be applied to obesity, using new drugs like semaglutide along with supportive lifestyle changes. - Yes, but we also need to address inequities. Many diabetes solutions are still out of reach for marginalized groups. We have to ensure obesity treatments don't follow the same pattern of accessibility issues. - Considering our discussion, what are the new research priorities looking forward? - We should focus on treatments targeting epigenetic changes that can effectively reset fat cell memory. This would help in long-term weight management and cut down on the cycle of losing and regaining weight. - But it's equally important to push for comprehensive policies that make these advancements available to all socioeconomic groups. Without this, we won't see the full benefits of scientific progress. - That's a lot to think about. Let's discuss potential future outcomes of the study. Eric, how about outlining a positive scenario? - Gladly, if we can develop treatments to target obesity-genic memory, we might see major improvements in long-term weight management. This could lead to lower obesity rates and better health outcomes across the board. - That sounds optimistic, but I'd argue if systemic issues aren't tackled. These treatments will only benefit the privileged few. - Kate, what's your alternative future scenario? - Without systemic change, obesity rates will keep climbing. We'll see increasing health disparities and a wider gap in health outcomes. It's a grim outlook, but realistic unless we take comprehensive action. - I think that's a bit too bleak. Scientific advances, if implemented correctly, could improve- - The problem is the implementation. Just look at current trends in low-income areas. They aren't gaining these benefits. It's not enough to just have the science. We need equitable distribution. - Can the healthcare sector help to balance these disparities? - Absolutely. Prioritizing equal access to healthcare is crucial. This new research can aid in tailoring strategies to ensure everyone benefits. - Healthcare alone won't solve everything. We can't ignore the impact of food deserts or the stress of living in poverty. Scientific solutions must go hand-in-hand with broader socioeconomic policies. - So what role does public policy play in this future? - Effective policies can integrate scientific breakthroughs into public health strategies. This would mean creating environments that support healthier lifestyles through things like zoning laws for supermarkets and improved healthcare access. - But those policies need grassroots support and advocacy. Real change comes from the ground up. Ensuring entire communities push for healthier and more equitable living conditions. - And what about technological advancements? Can they aid in addressing this issue? - Definitely. Technologies like CRISPR could eventually help by directly altering gene expression, potentially mitigating OB-sogenic effects at their root. - That's promising, but we're not there yet. We need immediate action on socioeconomic reforms to make sure any scientific progress translates into real world benefits. - Thank you both for this absorbing discussion. This has been Ted with quick news. We'll see you next time.