Weight loss linked to healthy eating not genetics, study finds

Participants who ate the most vegetables and consumed the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms

The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.

It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.

To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being randomly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.

Gene analysis identified differences are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.

What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.

Participants who ate the most vegetables and devoured the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.

Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study presented there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.

” We feed to fill our belly and, if that’s with veggies, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.

The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.

They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given indicated calorie restrictions nor were they provided with specific foods. Outcomes are based on what they reported eating.

Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.

Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.

The leading Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.

Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.

” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that rendered it ,” Stanton said.” For instance, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”

While most diets worked, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.

” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

Weight loss linked to healthy eating not genetics, study determines

Participants who ate the most veggies and ingested the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms

The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.

It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.

To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being haphazardly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.

Gene analyses identified differences are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.

What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.

Participants who ate the most veggies and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary beverages and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.

Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study demonstrated there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.

” We feed to fill our stomach and, if that’s with vegetables, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.

The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.

They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given suggested calorie limits nor were they supplied with specific foods. Results are based on what they reported eating.

Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.

Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.

The resulting Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.

Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.

” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that furnished it ,” Stanton said.” For instance, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”

While most diets ran, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.

” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

Weight loss linked to healthy eating not genetics, study determines

Participants who ate the most vegetables and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary beverages and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms

The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.

It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.

To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being randomly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.

Gene analyses identified variations are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.

What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.

Participants who ate the most veggies and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary drinkings and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.

Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study presented there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.

” We feed to fill our stomach and, if that’s with veggies, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.

The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.

They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given suggested calorie restrictions nor were they provided with specific foods. Results are based on what they reported eating.

Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.

Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.

The leading Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.

Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.

” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that rendered it ,” Stanton said.” For example, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”

While most diets worked, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.

” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

You Don’t Require a Personal Genetics Test to Take Charge of Your Health

The online storefront for the consumer genetics company Orig3n features an image of a young woman facing toward a sepia horizon. Her tresses are wavy, her triceps enviably toned. Her determined stance complements the copy floating beside her: “Take charge of your future, ” it reads. “Orig3n DNA tests uncover the links between your genes and how you think, act, and feel. The more you know, the easier it is to reach your highest potential.”

It’s the promise of a growing number of services: Genetic insights you can act on. There are exams tailored to tell you about your diet, your fitness, your complexion–even your wine preference. Helix, another consumer genetics company, sells a Wine Explorer service that recommends wine “scientifically selected based on your DNA.”

But researchers will tell you to approach lifestyle-tailored testing kits with extreme skepticism. “What you see in the interests of consumers genetics market is that legitimate genetic findings, often from analyzes with very large sample sizes, are being turned around and marketed to people in a way that connotes it’s going to be actionable for individuals, ” says Harvard geneticist Robert Green, who’s been researching direct-to-consumer genetic testing for closely connected to 20 years. But in most cases, he says, the extent to which consumers can act upon their results “really remains to be proven.”

Not that researchers aren’t trying. On the contrary: This week, scientists led by Christopher Gardner, director of nutrition examines at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, published one of the most rigorous investigations to date on whether dieters can use personal DNA results to identify more effective weight-loss strategies. The researchers compared the effectiveness of low fat and low carbohydrate diets in a year-long randomized controlled trial involving more than 600 test subjects. And crucially, the researchers also looked at whether test subjects’ genes impacted their results. Earlier analyzes, some led by Gardner, had suggested that a combination of mutations in PPARG, ADRB2, and PABP2, three genes connected with the metabolism of fat and carbohydrates, could predispose test subjects to lose more weight on one diet than the other.

But research results, which appear in this week’s issue of the Journal of American Medicine, saw no association between test subjects’ genetic profiles and their success with either program; test subjects lost the same amount of weight, irrespective of which diet they were assigned. And analyse participants who were assigned diets that “matched” their genetic profile fared no better than those who weren’t.

“When I assured the results, this wave of letdown rinsed over me, ” Gardner says. “It was like, wait, it didn’t work? None of the genetic variants had an effect? ”

Nope. The analyze was big, well-designed, and pricey( it received funding from the Nutrition Science Initiative, a non-profit devoted to funding rigorous nutrition research ), yet it failed to replicate smaller, less carefully controlled analyses. Such is science! It also illustrates why establishing the usefulness of home DNA kits will be so difficult and day consuming. Research into the link between genetic determinants and diet will probably continue; for the JAMA study, Gardner and his colleagues examined the predictive power of mutants in just three genes, but there are dozens to consider, in a staggering number of combinings. It’s plausible–even likely, Gardner says–that some of these genetic signatures could lead people to more effective diets. “But nutrition is just so complex, it’s not likely there’s going to be an answer soon.”

And that’s for nutrition. The odds of somebody money a rigorous, controlled investigation into the link between your DNA and your ideal exercising regimen are … well … let’s just say that kind of research isn’t very high on researchers’ to do list.

“It’s hard to make a case for studying anything in the lifestyle realm, because it’s pretty low stakes, ” says geneticist Lawrence Brody, director of the Division of Genomics and Society at the National Human Genome Research Institute. Personalized cancer treatments, rare-disease diagnosis, reproductive health screening–you know, the urgent stuff–these are the types of genomic investigations that receive funding. Which is why, even in a field as large as nutrition research, Brody says there are few examples of studies examining the link between genetics and diet with the level of rigor you find in Gardner’s JAMA study. “A lot of researchers don’t think it’s a high enough priority, or likely enough to show outcomes, to conduct and fund a full randomized trial.”

And just think: If it’s that hard to conduct a solid examine on actionable associations between DNA and diet, imagine how unlikely it is we’ll insure RCTs on personalized skin care plans, “what attains your child unique, “ or your “unique superhero traits”.

You might expect consumer genetics companies to fund this kind of research themselves. Guess again. Most don’t have the money, and, even for those that do, it’s risky to perform such studies in the first place, in the event they turn up results like Gardner’s. “Most companies don’t feel they need those kinds of studies to sell a narrative that supports the purchase of their products, ” Green says.

All of which should make consumers wary of lifestyle-oriented commercial Dna kits, which occupies a grey area somewhere between tests for ancestry and, say, cancer-associated mutants. The experts I spoke with were all optimistic about the long-term future of in-home DNA kits, and supportive of people’s right to access their genetic datum. But right now, for most tests, the evidence base just isn’t there. Something to keep in mind the next time a personal genetics company’s motivational ad connotes their kit can phase you toward a more effective diet or workout, or tell you “whether your genes have the raw potential football legend John Lynch looks for in a player.”.

On the upside, the participants in Gardner’s JAMA study lost a combined 6,500 pounds, averaging 13 pounds of weight loss apiece, regardless of their genetic profile, and regardless of their assigned diet. A plenty of people hear “genetics” and think “destiny, ” but the vast majority of the time, that’s not how genes run. Which means that the vast majority of the time, you don’t need a personal genetics test to take charge of your future.

More Consumer Genetics

Helix’s bold plan to be your one stop personal genomics shop

Will your baby like cilantro? These genetics exams say they can tell.

Ancestry sold 1.5 million genetic testing kits over Black Friday .

Weight loss linked to healthy feeing not genetics, examine discovers

Participants who feed the most vegetables and devoured the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms

The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.

It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.

To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being randomly to be given to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.

Gene analyses identified differences linked with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.

What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.

Participants who eat the most vegetables and devoured the fewest processed foods, sugary beverages and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.

Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study depicted there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.

” We feed to fill our stomach and, if that’s with veggies, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.

The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Participants had 22 health education classes during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they feed.

They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not devoted suggested calorie limits nor were they provided with specific foods. Results are based on what they reported eating.

Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.

Both groups reduced their daily calorie uptake by an average of about 500 calories.

The resulting Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” analyze highlighted the importance of feeing plenty of vegetables.

Stanton advises people to seek professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.

” Some previous examines that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that furnished it ,” Stanton told.” For example, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”

While most diets worked, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.

” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

Sperm Of Obese Men Could Pass Chance Of Weight Gain To Their Children

The evidence is stacking up that DNA is not the only information that can be passed between parents and their children. More and more research is uncovering the role that epigenetics the idea that environmental factors or stressful events can physically alter how a persons genes are expressed also has the potential to be inherited. Adding to this, a new study has found evidence to suggest that a mans weight could impact these epigenetic factors in his sperm, passing on a predisposition to obesity to his children.

Our research could lead to changing behavior, especially pre-conception behavior of the parent, explains Romain Barrs, who led such studies that has been published in Cell Metabolism. It’s common knowledge that when a woman is pregnant she should take care of herself not drink alcohol, stay away from pollutants but if the implication of our study holds true, then recommendations should be directed towards men, too.

The notion that environmental factors, such as smoking or stress, can change the expres of our genes has been growing over the last few years. Whilst it has already been shown that activities like smoking can cause our Dna to mutate, which can then lead to cancer, the idea that it could also be altering which genes are turned on and turned off, and to what degree, has been contentious. More controversial is the suggestion that psychological or physical trauma might also be having the same effect, with one study claiming that survivors of the Holocaust could passthe trauma on to their children.

Normally, which genes are activated and thus which proteins are produced is controlled by what are known as methyl groups. These chemical tags stick to the region of Dna that the cell wants to express, acting in effect like a dimmer switch, turning up and down the rate the genes are read. It now seems that where these methyl groups attach to the DNA in cells can be influenced by external environmental factors, and not only that, but that these are then passed down from parent to child.

In the first part, this new study compared the Dna in the sperm from 13 lean and 10 obese men, in order to draw up the differences in the epigenetics between the two groups. They found that in the sperm from the obese men, there were markers on parts of the Dna links with brain development and appetite. The researchers then looked at how these epigenetic changes changed in the sperm for a group of six obese men from before, and after undergoing extensive weight loss surgery. They found that the markers in the obese men had changed after only one week post-surgery, and again one year on.

Whilst the researchers confess that they dont know exactly how these changesaffect the gene, the fact that they are associated with the regions of the DNA linked to appetite suggest, they claim, that they could have a role in predisposing their offspring to weight gain. One of the researchers suggests that it could that the body has evolved so that during times of abundance, these epigenetic changes could promote infants to eat more and grow bigger.

Read more: www.iflscience.com