scientists treated male mice with a technique that mimics the effects of leptin, a hormone that acts
on the brain to suppress appetite. Treated mice were more likely to approach female mice than their
food bowls — even if the test rodents had been deprived of food for almost an entire day.
The paper “addresses a huge gap in the field”, she says. “When you no longer need to eat urgently, it
should free you up to do other things.”
That's.... the most obvious thing in the entire world. If you're hungry, you can't think about anything but food. If you're not hungry, you can think about things other than food.
We're looking at the next Ig Nobel prize winner, aren't we?
It seems obvious, but I think an important part of science is to remain skeptical and not accept things as fact because they’re “obvious.”
It very well could have turned out that the mice still chose to eat despite having no hunger. I for one am definitely prone to overeating past the point of satiating hunger, or eating even if I’m not hungry. I find it satisfying and a way to overcome boredom; or maybe a better example is my dog, who I’m pretty certain would eat himself to death if I left his kibble box unlocked.
It seems obvious that the sun revolves around the Earth, but we now know that isn’t true. :-)
I recall reading a funny article, by some guys at cornell if my memory does not fail me, that concluded that obesity rates were lower in europe because europeans would stop eating when they weren't hungry anymore. Whereas americans would stop eating when turning off the TV (and therefore would continue eating after being full).
Think another example. The sun evolves around the horizon. So are the stars and the moon. The earth is obviously the centre of the universe. Is it not? Now or course we have all the facts and arguments to back up otherwise.
But how do we know what we believed is really what what it is?
they didn't know what the result of their experiment would be. If it had come out differently, it would have sent them back to the drawing board.
they hypothesized that this particular drug/hormone intervention would have a particular effect, and an experiment was needed to confirm the hypothesis. Further experiments might show that they were even wrong even about this one, and there is some other interaction going on to fully explain what's going on.
I’d be curious if the inverse is also possible, social interactions triggering the release of leceptin. Perhaps social interaction could cause feelings of satiety too?
> social interaction could cause feelings of satiety too?
depends on the circumstances, but I can imagine social interactions where food is served still causing me to at least ask for a phone number, so it's clear I'm not entirely sated.
This is great content, I enjoyed reading this comment, but HN has been such a wonderful place for such a wonderful time because we just don't do the reddit thing around here :)
not any of the ops, but the alternative to singling out this comment would be replying to all of the others, or remain silent in face of the mob. I don't think his choice requires defense than that.
We're looking at the next Ig Nobel prize winner, aren't we?