Dr. Edlund's Weekly Column Appearing in the |
||
![]() |
||
| A Fat Vaccine? | ||
Matthew Edlund M.D., M.O.H. |
||
It was another triumph of media hype, shortchanging hope. First, the hype. When leptin, which acts as the yin-yang opposition of ghrelin, was discovered about ten years ago, it was described as the key to the war on obesity. Injecting leptin in rats and mice caused them to stop eating. Human studies were eagerly awaited. The results? Nothing. Injecting humans did not cause them to lose their appetites, except temporarily. Weight loss did not occur. Though many experiments are performed with rats, mice, and rabbits, translating their success to humans is difficult. Though researchers like to point out the many similarities between rats and humans, we live a lot longer, have a very different environment, a rather different immune system, and noxious responses to many experimental drugs. As Harvard cancer researcher Judah Folkman said years ago, ÒWe can cure most tumors Ñ in the mouse.Ó
The unfortunate result of vaccinating fat hype is twofold. First, it convinces a credulous public that Òmiraculous curesÓ are waiting at the end of the rainbow. If you live long enough, ÒscienceÓ will produce a major treatment that will whisk away your fat, clogged arteries and halfdead brain cells, and convert you into a healthy, young stripling. Problem two is that such hype keeps us away from public health measures that do work. People have a fair idea of what health authorities tell them to eat. They suspect they must somehow become physically active. A few are beginning to have a small idea of how sleep and rest affect their weight and overall function. But are they willing to do the work to change things? Why should one bother when miracle cures are around the corner? Americans remain remarkably optimistic. A full three quarters of obese people in this country recently told researchers they Òeat healthy.Ó A majority also think they Òexercise regularly.Ó These personal definitions generally have nothing in common with what researchers think is healthy behavior. The reality is sadly different. A recent study of ÒminimallyÓ healthy behavior in American adults looked at four factors Ñ keeping body mass index below 25; walking or moving four times a week for 30 minutes; not smoking; eating a bunch of plantstuffs occasionally. The level of compliance among male adults Ñ 3%. Thus 97% did not reach minimal criteria for healthy behavior. Reality avoidance is now a national pastime, whether it involves, diet, exercise, the national sleep debt, the Federal debt crisis or foreign policy Òsuccesses.Ó Reality avoidance can be nearly complete and last a long time. When it breaks down, pushed aside by unwavering realities, its destruction can be devastating. Consider the Nasdaq stock market in 2000, or recent promises of suddenly remaking the Middle East. There are simple plans out there that should work for the US. Going FAR Ñ Food-Activity-Rest Ñ is one. Getting the population to walk a few minutes after every meal would save ten of thousands of lives and keep millions of people from dementia, while also helping the environment. Such public health prospects receive close to nothing from the Treasury. They are admittedly less glamorous than liposuction, $30,000 defibrillators, or million dollar shock wave machines. Wall Street is very well aware that high technology health care pays much better than keeping the population healthy. The yearly $100 billion in health care profits is not being plowed back into the public health. |
||
![]() | ![]() |
|