
The Wrong Eating Habits Can Hurt Your Brain, Not Just Your Waistline - chang2301
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/12/30/506433671/the-wrong-eating-habits-can-hurt-your-brain-not-just-your-waistline?utm_source=pocket&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pockethits
======
mi100hael
_> He says something similar may happen in human brains when people eat a diet
high in fat and sugar. Davidson says there's a vicious cycle of bad diets and
brain changes. He points to a 2015 study in the Journal of Pediatrics that
found obese children performed more poorly on memory tasks that test the
hippocampus compared with kids who weren't overweight._

These assertions raise doubts in my mind regarding the study as a whole. Fat
and sugar (a carbohydrate) account for two of the three most common
macronutrients, the third being protein. Eating a diet that's low in both fat
and carbs would imply a mostly-protein diet which can lead to illness[0].

The further implication that a particular macronutrient ratio could cause
obesity is particularly concerning. Weight gain/loss is determined strictly by
whether someone consumes more or fewer calories than their body burns in a
day. The ratio of macronutrients may effect other health indicators like lean
body mass, but a diet of 100% sugar and fat will still lead to weight loss if
the total caloric intake is lower than what the body requires thereby
requiring the body to burn muscle/fat for energy[1].

While the researchers have found a correlation between memory function and
obesity, they appear to be making spurious claims that the foods the obese
people eat are a contributing factor. There's no indication they made any
attempt to control for the fact that healthy people also regularly enjoy ice
cream and bacon, just at a lesser rate than those who are chronic over-eaters
and therefore obese.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning)
[1] [http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/06/health/la-he-
fitness...](http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/06/health/la-he-fitness-
twinkie-diet-20101206)

~~~
bitwize
This is the "a calorie is a calorie is a calorie" argument, and it's not true.
Sugar upsets the metabolic process in disconcerting ways, leading to fat
accumulation and insulin resistance; sugar is also more addictive than
cocaine[0]. Meaning that when you consume calories from sugar, you crave more
sugar calories. The foods you eat _do_ make a difference in how fat you get,
because they alter your metabolism and behavior -- but Western foods are so
loaded with added sugar that sugar becomes difficult to control for.

[0]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23719144](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23719144)

~~~
another_account
Yes, macro break down, thyroid issues, metabolism, illness, meal timing, GI,
insulin spikes, hormone levels etc do make a difference. To grab at a generous
figure lets say they make up 25% of the puzzle. With calories in VS calories
out been 75%. And i think that 25% is very, very generous.

Stating calories in VS calories out is not true because of X, Y or Z is like
building a house by starting with the doorbell. Before you lay the
foundations. Fundamentals before details.

------
costcopizza
This falls into the category of "things I didn't know, but I assumed anyway."

I don't know why the brain and body are still presented as being so distant--
it's all one system!

If you're treating your body poorly, how is that _not_ going to negatively
effect the most important and complex organ of said body?

~~~
tmikaeld
I think this has much to do with commercial interests.. if there where a
higher stigma around the actual cognitive effects of junk-food and sugar it
could generate fewer sales.

A fitting Terrance McKenna quote:

We do not think of ourselves as a meat/sugar/alcohol culture. People do not
walk around saying "Oh wow, I'm so high on meat, alcohol and sugar!" but they
ARE!

~~~
mtberatwork
My takeaway from Michael Pollan's books was that we are essentially a corn
culture, but a "meat/sugar/alcohol culture" works too I suppose.

------
heptathorp
I'm not seeing how this evidence points to overeating --> brain impairment. To
me it implies brain impairment --> overeating.

> He did that by studying rats that had very specific types of hippocampal
> damage and seeing what happened to them.

This researcher started with mice that had damage, and observed they overate.
This implies brain impairment --> overeating. The other memory studies in the
article with obese or lean subjects cannot infer causality.

> However, even though we are beginning to understand that obesity affects the
> brain, we don't exactly know how [...]

Perhaps the connection is people with brain impairment (either genetic or
damage from the environment) tend to overeat, since the brain plays a role in
hunger and satiation. Is there evidence that the article omits that backs up
the headline?

~~~
ddlatham
It doesn't directly imply that brain impairment causes overeating either.
Perhaps something else is causing both. Causation is hard.

~~~
leetrout
That's true- and on that note I wonder if it's the gut in general and it's all
related in a cycle. (Given the compounding evidence your gut directly affects
your brain.)

From
[http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/healthy_aging/healthy_...](http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/healthy_aging/healthy_body/the-
brain-gut-connection): "For decades, researchers and doctors thought that
anxiety and depression contributed to these problems. But our studies and
others show that it may also be the other way around," Pasricha says.

------
charlieflowers
I don't buy that they "forgot they were full" because of diminished short term
memory. When people overeat, I do not buy that it is because they actually
forgot that they already ate.

Some other brain effect could make sense, but this one seems weak.

~~~
tmikaeld
They are talking about the rats, with people, it's the fact that people don't
feel full - they still feel hungry, so they continue to eat.

~~~
fao_
How do you know it's not the same for the rats? :P

------
cossatot
I notice a moderate effect on my cognitive ability due to weekly or monthly
alcohol consumption (longer term than the hangover cycle). There have been a
few times in my life (such as when studying for my PhD comprehensive exams)
that I quit drinking completely for over a month and I was quite surprised at
how much more clarity of thought and memory I had. Not enough to make me
abstain from drinking altogether, but enough that it's helped me drink
substantially less.

~~~
treehau5
People _reeeeally_ overestimate just how many drinks and with what frequency
it takes to cross into that "it's negatively affecting my health" threshold.

The mayo clinic recommends these standards

Up to one drink a day for women of all ages.

Up to one drink a day for men older than age 65.

Up to two drinks a day for men age 65 and younger.

The limit for men is higher because men generally weigh more and have more of
an enzyme that metabolizes alcohol than women do.

A drink is defined as:

12 ounces (355 milliliters, or mL) of beer

5 ounces (148 mL) of wine

1.5 ounces (44 mL) of 80-proof distilled spirits

Most people from my experience:

\- Pour a glass of wine way over 5 ounces \- Drink pints of beer at the bar,
which are 16 oz, not 12, and drink at least 2 or 3.

The moderate part is the key, both in frequency, and amount. Not drinking all
week, then binge drinking is worse than simply drinking one drink every day of
the week.

~~~
mtberatwork
Indeed...furthermore, people severely overestimate the amount of calories they
burn through exercise and vastly underestimate the amount of calories they
consume.

------
coldcode
Assuming sugars and all saturated fats are both equally to blame is not in
tune with modern research, though of course a lot of competing voices exist.

~~~
treehau5
Saturated fat in itself is not the problem. Caloric excess in the form of
saturated fat is. Athletes consume more saturated fat because it increases
testosterone production
([https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9029197?dopt=Abstract](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9029197?dopt=Abstract))

A hamburger won't kill you. A hamburger if you live a sedentary lifestyle
will.

~~~
matwood
Also, a single hamburger will not kill you. Eating 5 Guys for lunch every day
is going to be a problem.

------
oriel
Having been on a ketogentic diet (low carbs, high fat) for the last 5 months
or so, this is in line with what I've seen.

I went on the diet because of the promise of a clearer head, as well as
general health improvement. It made sense, as I'd been plotting my work
efficiency with and without sugary products. The complete removal of all carbs
has done nothing but improve my life.

The carb addiction component mentioned elsewhere lines up as well. At the
beginning of the diet, there's a period called the keto flu that lasts a
couple weeks. It's described as mental fogging, headaches, dehydration, etc.
While this is also attributed to the switching of metabolic pathways (more
water and electrolytes are needed daily), the effects were very similar to
caffeine withdrawal.

And of course I indulged in sugar through the holidays, and found myself
figuratively face down in a gutter each time ;)

------
liminal
At first the article claims that saturated fats and sugars are to blame, but
then all the evidence discusses obesity regardless of diet composition and
claims we don't understand the mechanisms. Not a well written article...

------
ctvo
Hire someone overweight who might have issues with stress, memory, may require
additional time off due to health issues or hire someone who looks relatively
healthy. If not explicitly, implicitly this type of discrimination must
happen.

