By Dorie Obertello
No one will deny that America, as a country, is overweight. Some states have obesity rates that surpass 1 in every 4. There are countless theories as to why this is the case. Is it socioeconomic? Cultural? Medical?
A study by Don Katz from Brandeis University about taste got me thinking not about why American is fat, but how we could fix it. It does not seem that Katz has looked at the weight loss angle of his research, but I see a very possible link.
A popular remedy to excess weight, other than diet and exercise (which for some is too gradual or ineffective) is surgery. This seems a bit extreme because while it is effective, it is also incredibly dangerous. There must be a better way to return quickly and permanently to normal weight.
Katz is studying the links between tastes and emotions. He has postulated that every taste, without exception, invokes a tangible response, usually in the form of brain activity. However, many tastes also evoke emotions, often mirror images of feelings about the setting and/or experience of past consumption.
He has found that if a taste is associated with a negative experience and negative emotions, the taste itself will become disliked. This is called taste aversion. It holds true for a number of animals, from humans to mice (Katz is currently using mice).
So, what if doctors and scientists could program obese patients to loath unhealthy foods? The idea is not extraordinary. All that would be necessary is a bad experience to accompany the taste. If French fires and fried chicken seem vile due to a particularly nasty past stomachache, there is little risk an overweight individual will want to eat them.
Taking the idea a step further, perhaps children could be taught preemptively to dislike certain fattening or non-nutritious foods in an effort to stem the growing “epidemic,” as some call it. Of course, this preventative measure is not right for everyone. However, for those at risk, a picky palette is better than a lifetime of health trouble.
The idea of associating a negative response to break a habit has been used in smaller-scale instances before. For example, if someone needs to break a nail-biting habit, certain nail polishes will leave an awful, sour taste in their mouth when they begin to chew on their nails. This taste, however, causes no bodily harm. I believe that “programming” obese subjects to dislike food would definitely be beneficial to their long-term health, but would also be hard to accomplish. Creating a negative response toward unhealthy foods in obese patients is a much more serious proposal. If a subject becomes violently ill from eating an unhealthy food, they would probably be less inclined to eat the food in the future, but there could be repercussions and the possible filing of a lawsuit if the negative response, due to a bad physical reaction, caused serious bodily harm. However, lawsuits have been filed in the opposite situation, against fast-food restaurants, by their obese customers, who claim that these restaurants caused them to be obese when since the restaurants should have told them more about the consequences of frequently eating fast-food. Potential legal action is a fear in both situations. For example, in November of 2002, obese teenagers in Manhattan, New York filed a lawsuit against McDonalds, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2502431.stm) claiming that the company was responsible for making them fat. They complained that McDonalds was withholding information from customers concerning nutrition facts. McDonalds’ lawyer responded to the claims by saying, “The understanding and comprehension of what hamburgers and French fries do has been with us for a long, long time.” It seem that in any situation there can be repercussions, so why not try to decrease the rate of obesity in the population if the threat of legal action is present equally in situations that try to “cure obesity” and situations where there is no movement to prevent obesity.
Comment by Samantha Jones — April 26, 2008 @ 9:13 pm
While Dorie Obertello’s post provides interesting and informative insight into the food and weight issues confronting Americans, emotions and fatty foods do not tell the whole story behind the ever growing American waistline. Many dieticians will tell you portion size is often times just as important as the kind of food we consume, or as the old adage suggests, “everything in moderation.” Dorie’s thoughts on the use of taste aversion to stem cravings for unhealthy foods are noteworthy and merit further investigation, but recent research by Brian Wasink at Cornell University has shown that our eyes may have more to do with weight gain than our stomachs. Wasink studied the affects of visual reference points on people’s appetites by using “bottomless” soup bowls that were constantly refilled through a hidden tube. His results showed that when asked to eat until they were full, students ate almost twice as much if they were eating out of “bottomless” bowls compared to normal ones. What is really provocative, however, is that those with bottomless bowls thought that they had eaten just as much, but not more, than their counterparts because visually they had also eaten half a bowl of soup. Furthermore, in a survey of college students, 81 percent said they would use a visual reference point to decide when to stop eating a bowl of soup. Wasink’s research suggests that our stomachs are not the only part of our body deciding when we are full and may not even be the most important factor in determining how much food we consume. The visual part of our appetites is far more influential than we ever considered and plays a central role in the amount of food we eat at every meal. In light of this astounding research, fooling our eyes appears to be just as important as fooling our stomachs in assembling a healthy diet. Some suggestions for curbing our visual appetites include using smaller plates and bowls, as well switching to taller, thinner glasses for drinks. Given that people’s appetites can be influenced with simple visual tricks listed above and that taste may not even be the main factor in consumption, the use of taste aversion seems a bit extreme. Eating should be one of the more enjoyable parts of life and everyone is entitled to a little indulgence now and again, after all even those on death row get to enjoy a last meal.
Comment by Brian Butterworth — April 28, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
This article brought to mind a recent conversation that I had with some friends over lunch. We got onto the topic of physical education class in high school and how it relates to this country’s immediate problem of obesity. I went to a public high school in New York State that required a 40-minute gym class every other day for all four years, complete with physical fitness tests once a semester. My friend who went to a public high school near Washington DC, however, had to take only one year of physical education. In a study performed by the CDC, a mere 55.7% of high school students were registered for a physical education class (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5336a5.htm) Is this the difference between people that are active throughout the rest of their lives and people who are not?
As much as we’d love to have the easy way out, the only truly effective method to combat obesity in this country will be a major lifestyle readjustment, not on the parts of individuals, but on the country as a whole. There is too much temptation that exists in this culture. If we want to fix the obesity problem in the United States, we need to teach our children healthy eating behavior and introduce them into physical education early on. After all, habits are hard to break.
Comment by Intro 105 Student — May 5, 2008 @ 4:36 pm
Out of my family of four, I am the only one who has not struggled with obesity, and thus have grown up in awe of how deep-seated “emotional eating” can be, and how much damage it can cause. The growing ‘epidemic’ of obesity in children is frightening, to say the least, and the efforts of school nutrition education programs seem sadly futile. In one look (school nutrition) at 57 schools with such programs, the results are pretty negative: kids offered free fruits and vegetables ate less than before, those given ‘healthy eating prizes’ only changed their ways while the prizes were offered, and even those convinced they were exhibiting better habits showed no change in blood pressure or cholesterol. Beyond that, parents are not taking responsibility for teaching their children to eat right, and this article suggests they contribute biologically to bad habits as well. Mothers’ food preferences may be passed along to their children during pregnancy. ” Poverty and the media also contribute to the rise in obesity as fast food is well advertised and cheap. A lot cheaper than fresh veggies, whole wheat non-processed bread, organic sugar-free juices and that 85% dark chocolate for desert.
On a separate shorter note, a study (sweet-blind rats) was conducted on rats whose brains were altered so they had no way to taste “sweetness” on their tongues. Even in the absence of taste, however, the rats still showed preference for the sweetened water. This “post-ingestive” effect suggests that “calorie-rich nutrients can directly influence brain reward circuits”. So while taste is definitely packed with pleasure or disgust, and definitely with emotion, it seems our preference for those sweet fatty foods runs deeper than the surface of the tongue.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0902/is_3_29/ai_76558496
Comment by Becca F — May 6, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Dr. Wasink’s research is also discussed in this post: http://intro2psych.wordpress.com/2007/10/10/serving-up-food-research-with-a-big-spoon/
Comment by intro2psych — May 10, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
This idea of “programming” people to act in certain ways has been used by medical professionals in the past. One such therapy, which was used in the past, is electroshock. The recording artist Lou Reed had electroshock therapy administered on himself at the behest of his parents in order to “cure” him of his exhibited homosexual tendencies as a teenager. (McNeil & McCain, 1996)
Electroshock therapy, however, had terrible side effects on Reed. For instance, he notes that he was “unable to read a book because you get to page seventeen and have to go right back to page one again.” (McNeil & McCain, 1996, p.4) What Reed experienced is a form of rapid short-term memory loss that occurs for several weeks after therapy is administered (http://www.theuniversityhospital.com/ect/effects.htm).
The point here is that we shouldn’t just view the reprogramming of behaviors through applied therapies as a quick fix. Instead, we need to consider all of the side effects that these treatments might have, just as we do with drugs.
Sources Used:
An Overview of ECT: Side Effects and Risks:
http://www.theuniversityhospital.com/ect/effects.htm
Mcneil, L. & McCain, G. (1996). Please Kill Me: The Uncensored Oral History of Punk. New York: Grove Press.
Comment by 105 student — May 10, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
This article not only brings to light America’s problem with obesity, but also problems with eating and health related disorders in general. There is a large range of eating disorders. In addition to obesity, a large percentage of Americans struggle with bulimia and anorexia. At the opposite end of the spectrum (from obesity), “Sixty-five percent of American women between the ages of 25 and 45 report having disordered eating behaviors” and three out of four American women struggle with disordered eating (http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2008/04/080422202514.htm).
These disorders stem from concerns with body image and weight gain, which pervade racial and ethnic boundaries. Like obesity’s perilous effects, anorexia and bulimia lead to high mortality rates. Studies show other long-term effects include abnormal bone structure and complications with conceiving children later in life (http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2008/11/081118071132.htm).
However, this article suggests that doctors and scientists could possibly program obese patients to loathe unhealthy foods. If this is the case, could they also program those with anorexia and bulimia—making them underweight— to prefer highly caloric foods that aid with weight gain?
Comment by Jennifer Beckerman — April 7, 2009 @ 2:01 pm
This idea is extremely intriguing, but also a little bit sad–if someone is “programmed” to hate unhealthy foods, will they get as much enjoyment out of mealtimes as their peers? Eating is a very social experience, and if all of your friends are going out for an ice cream cone and the idea of ice cream makes you feel physically ill, I’d imagine that you would feel left out and upset. Desserts are completely ok if eaten in moderation, and it’s important not to deprive yourself. If emotional eating is a problem and leads to obesity, the first step to getting back to a healthy weight could be a less drastic approach such as therapy to get to the root of those unhealthy emotions that are causing the overeating and commitment to a new diet and exercise plan.
After other treatments for the underlying problem are attempted, then I think that the “programming” idea could be really effective, as long as the patient completely understands the what he or she is getting into.
Comment by Julia Moy — March 7, 2013 @ 7:32 pm