Obese child abuse.

Uh, no. No diabetes gene, no diabetes.

how do you think that gene came along?? could it be from generations of poor
eating habits??

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

In article ,
Steve Knight wrote:


Uh, no. No diabetes gene, no diabetes.

how do you think that gene came along?? could it be from generations of poor
eating habits??

A cosmic ray causing a mutation is more likely.

Chuck Demas

--
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
| \___/ | http://world.std.com/~cpd

In article ,
Steve Knight wrote:


Uh, no. No diabetes gene, no diabetes.

how do you think that gene came along?? could it be from generations of poor
eating habits??

A cosmic ray causing a mutation is more likely.

Chuck Demas

--
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
| \___/ | http://world.std.com/~cpd

Steve Knight wrote:


Uh, no. No diabetes gene, no diabetes.

how do you think that gene came along?? could it be from generations of poor
eating habits??

I suspect it's too widespread for a bad mutation to proliferate
like that. And mutations don't occur from generations of habits
They occur at random in an individual (egg, sperm or embryo) and the
offspring of the individual inherits the mutated gene -- in the rare
case that the mutation isn't lethal, because most are.

It seems more likely to me that the original human condition was
not to have a metabolism that could handle a large carb load because
it didn't need one. Before cooking and agriculture, humans didn't
eat a large amount of high carb foods. Most starchy foods in the
wild form aren't very digestible raw. Fruits were much smaller,
less sweet and only seasonally available.

Then when cooking and farming developed, a mutation allowing better
survival on high carb grain or starchy roots was passed on to lots of
descendants, eventually becoming dominant, because they could better
survive periods of scarcity of animal foods than people without the
mutated gene.

I have nothing to back up this notion, merely what little I know about
genetics and mutation suggests to me that it's more likely than the
idea that a bad mutation was able to spread to a large percent of
the population.

--
jamie )

"There's a seeker born every minute."

Steve Knight wrote:


Uh, no. No diabetes gene, no diabetes.

how do you think that gene came along?? could it be from generations of poor
eating habits??

I suspect it's too widespread for a bad mutation to proliferate
like that. And mutations don't occur from generations of habits
They occur at random in an individual (egg, sperm or embryo) and the
offspring of the individual inherits the mutated gene -- in the rare
case that the mutation isn't lethal, because most are.

It seems more likely to me that the original human condition was
not to have a metabolism that could handle a large carb load because
it didn't need one. Before cooking and agriculture, humans didn't
eat a large amount of high carb foods. Most starchy foods in the
wild form aren't very digestible raw. Fruits were much smaller,
less sweet and only seasonally available.

Then when cooking and farming developed, a mutation allowing better
survival on high carb grain or starchy roots was passed on to lots of
descendants, eventually becoming dominant, because they could better
survive periods of scarcity of animal foods than people without the
mutated gene.

I have nothing to back up this notion, merely what little I know about
genetics and mutation suggests to me that it's more likely than the
idea that a bad mutation was able to spread to a large percent of
the population.

--
jamie )

"There's a seeker born every minute."

"Ernie Sty" wrote in message ...

When a mother is ABUSING her child by brainwashing her into eating
habits

That is mere speculation on your part.

The child was obese, the child was being fed junk food. That is not
speculation it is FACT.

that will cause her ill-health and an early death, then it
becomes everyone else's business.

That is simply an opinion.

Child abuse IS everyone else's business, that is not just an opinion,
that is why there are laws.

And if you can't see that causing
obesity in children is an EVIL

The word "evil" is usually used as an excuse to deny someone their rights.
If I label you or your actions "evil", I have not only the right but the
responsibility, as an agent of good, to stop you by whatever means
necessary, and that almost always means violating your rights.

So you think that a parent has a right to force their child to be
obese and to teach it terrible eating habits? Is it to the right of
the state to intervene when a parent is abusing its child?

Obesity causes diabetes, no-one is denying that other than Fat
Acceptors.

Obesity causes diabetes in some people, this is true. It also causes heart
disease, osteoporosis, and other nasty diseases--in some people. Bear in
mind that it does not cause these diseases in everyone.

Then is it worth the risk to cause a child to become obese just for
the sake of laziness, i.e. not to bother cooking proper meals?

"jamie" wrote

It seems more likely to me that the original human condition was
not to have a metabolism that could handle a large carb load because
it didn't need one. Before cooking and agriculture, humans didn't
eat a large amount of high carb foods. Most starchy foods in the
wild form aren't very digestible raw. Fruits were much smaller,
less sweet and only seasonally available.

Another, similar theory is that the tendency to develop insulin resistance
was actually a helpful adaptation for early humans who may have been faced
with feast/famine situations. Insulin resistance helped keep individuals
from storing too much fat during periods when food was very abundant.
Excessive obesity would have been a handicap for hunter/gatherers in
obtaining food, especially in lean periods when more effort would have been
required. So as an adaptation to avoid super obesity, insulin resistance
would seem to have played a helpful role.

The problem for us in the modern world is that we never have lean periods
following the periods of abundant food, and the insulin resistance gets out
of control, overwhelming the pancreas' ability to produce insulin and
causing the chronic hyperglycemia we call diabetes.

Seems plausible to me I guess. The genetic tendency to develop insulin
resistance seems so widespread it seems kind of logical that there must have
been something about it that helped survival.

HG

"jamie" wrote

It seems more likely to me that the original human condition was
not to have a metabolism that could handle a large carb load because
it didn't need one. Before cooking and agriculture, humans didn't
eat a large amount of high carb foods. Most starchy foods in the
wild form aren't very digestible raw. Fruits were much smaller,
less sweet and only seasonally available.

Another, similar theory is that the tendency to develop insulin resistance
was actually a helpful adaptation for early humans who may have been faced
with feast/famine situations. Insulin resistance helped keep individuals
from storing too much fat during periods when food was very abundant.
Excessive obesity would have been a handicap for hunter/gatherers in
obtaining food, especially in lean periods when more effort would have been
required. So as an adaptation to avoid super obesity, insulin resistance
would seem to have played a helpful role.

The problem for us in the modern world is that we never have lean periods
following the periods of abundant food, and the insulin resistance gets out
of control, overwhelming the pancreas' ability to produce insulin and
causing the chronic hyperglycemia we call diabetes.

Seems plausible to me I guess. The genetic tendency to develop insulin
resistance seems so widespread it seems kind of logical that there must have
been something about it that helped survival.

HG

Hannah Gruen wrote:
Another, similar theory is that the tendency to develop insulin resistance
was actually a helpful adaptation for early humans who may have been faced
with feast/famine situations. Insulin resistance helped keep individuals
from storing too much fat during periods when food was very abundant.
Excessive obesity would have been a handicap for hunter/gatherers in
obtaining food, especially in lean periods when more effort would have been
required. So as an adaptation to avoid super obesity, insulin resistance
would seem to have played a helpful role.

The problem for us in the modern world is that we never have lean periods
following the periods of abundant food, and the insulin resistance gets out
of control, overwhelming the pancreas' ability to produce insulin and
causing the chronic hyperglycemia we call diabetes.

Seems plausible to me I guess. The genetic tendency to develop insulin
resistance seems so widespread it seems kind of logical that there must have
been something about it that helped survival.

I'm not following what you're saying. If insulin resistance promotes
more fat storage, how did it prevent excess fat storage?

--
jamie )

"There's a seeker born every minute."

Hannah Gruen wrote:
Another, similar theory is that the tendency to develop insulin resistance
was actually a helpful adaptation for early humans who may have been faced
with feast/famine situations. Insulin resistance helped keep individuals
from storing too much fat during periods when food was very abundant.
Excessive obesity would have been a handicap for hunter/gatherers in
obtaining food, especially in lean periods when more effort would have been
required. So as an adaptation to avoid super obesity, insulin resistance
would seem to have played a helpful role.

The problem for us in the modern world is that we never have lean periods
following the periods of abundant food, and the insulin resistance gets out
of control, overwhelming the pancreas' ability to produce insulin and
causing the chronic hyperglycemia we call diabetes.

Seems plausible to me I guess. The genetic tendency to develop insulin
resistance seems so widespread it seems kind of logical that there must have
been something about it that helped survival.

I'm not following what you're saying. If insulin resistance promotes
more fat storage, how did it prevent excess fat storage?

--
jamie )

"There's a seeker born every minute."