Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26740612›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2016

Fatness and fitness: exposing the logic of evolutionary explanations for obesity.

Andrew D Higginson, John M McNamara, Alasdair I Houston

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Food insecurity as a cause of adiposity: evolutionary and mechanistic hypotheses.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Models of body weight and fatness regulation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Obesity: an evolutionary context.Life metabolism · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew D HigginsonCentre for Research in Animal Behaviour, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QG, UK School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK adhigginson@gmail.com.
John M McNamaraSchool of Mathematics, University of Bristol, University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TW, UK.
Alasdair I HoustonSchool of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK.
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

European Research Council 250209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To explore the logic of evolutionary explanations of obesity we modelled food consumption in an animal that minimizes mortality (starvation plus predation) by switching between activities that differ in energy gain and predation. We show that if switching does not incur extra predation risk, the animal should have a single threshold level of reserves above which it performs the safe activity and below which it performs the dangerous activity. The value of the threshold is determined by the environmental conditions, implying that animals should have variable 'set points'. Selection pressure to prevent energy stores exceeding the optimal level is usually weak, suggesting that immediate rewards might easily overcome the controls against becoming overweight. The risk of starvation can have a strong influence on the strategy even when starvation is extremely uncommon, so the incidence of mortality during famine in human history may be unimportant for explanations for obesity. If there is an extra risk of switching between activities, the animal should have two distinct thresholds: one to initiate weight gain and one to initiate weight loss. Contrary to the dual intervention point model, these thresholds will be inter-dependent, such that altering the predation risk alters the location of both thresholds; a result that undermines the evolutionary basis of the drifty genes hypothesis. Our work implies that understanding the causes of obesity can benefit from a better understanding of how evolution shapes the mechanisms that control body weight.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionModels, TheoreticalAnimalsDecision MakingEatingFeeding BehaviorFood SupplyHumansObesityPredatory BehaviorStarvationStochastic Processesenergy balanceintake regulationobesitythrifty genotypethrifty phenotype

Identifiers

PMID26740612
PMCPMC4721100
OpenAlexW2225300206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.