Archive for May, 2010

More on “I can’t lose weight — it’s Genetic”

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

Interesting article in Sports Illustrated this week about genetics and athletic performance.

Yannis Pitsiladis, a biologist at the University of Glasgow, selected 24 gene variants most often associated with sprinting or endurance prowess and looked for them in the genomes of four men who have held the world record in the 100-meter dash and five who have held the world record in the marathon. What he saw was that based on those genes, the world-beaters are not genetic outliers at all. Pitsiladis analyzed the DNA of some of his graduate students for comparison and found that “a student of mine has a better rating for sprinting than the likes of an Asafa Powell or Usain Bolt.” (Pitsiladis is legally prohibited from identifying specific athletes with their genetic material, so he used Powell and Bolt as rhetorical examples.)

That rather startling result leaves two broad possibilities: First, there is a tremendous amount of work left to be done to find all the remaining genes that contribute to athletic success; second, something other than genetics is at work. Both may well be true, but only time and more research will rule on the former, while Pitsiladis has compiled considerable data on the latter.

Overall, it looks like many factors — not just genetics shape who we are.

“Genes do not act in a vacuum,” notes Bernd Heinrich, a biologist and author and the 1981 North American 100K champion. Heinrich, who grew up running to school, insists that “genes are very plastic. They can be turned on or off. Look at a caterpillar and a butterfly: They’ve got the same genes. One flies, and one can barely crawl.”

So, don’t blame your genetics for being out of shape.  Just get to work.

Watch those Restaurant Calorie Counts

Saturday, May 8th, 2010

Those calorie counts may not be what they seem:

Researchers at Tufts University bought 29 dishes from 10 restaurant chains, including Ruby Tuesday, McDonald’s, and Wendy’s, and analyzed them to see whether the menu calorie counts were right. Turns out that on average, the tested dishes contained 18 percent more calories than the amount listed. The differences ranged from 36 percent fewer calories to a jawdropping 200 percent more! Denny’s grits topped the higher-calorie list, thanks to what turned out to be a supersized portion.

It wasn’t all bad news—the Taco Bell nachos, P.F. Chang’s Cantonese shrimp, and Domino’s thin-crust cheese pizza had around 30 percent fewer calories than the menu listed. Bear in mind that researchers sampled just one of each item and that all were purchased in the Boston area; calories might well be different if you order the same dish in your local joint.

Read more here.

 
FOLLOW US BECOME A FAN

SIGNUP FOR THE MOTIV HEALTH & FITNESS NEWSLETTER