Questions about weight management genetics
NutriMe Weight Management
NutriMe Weight Management is made from biological materials and plant fibers.
This medical product demonstrably supports your losing weight efforts when you reduce the calories or fat intake, and also helps you maintain your weight if you pay attention to a balanced diet and lifestyle. NutriMe Weight Management is therefore not a free ticket for overindulgence, but increases your success in lifestyle changes with the same effort.
Currently there are over 100 genes that seem to be connected to obesity. These genes are in the blood sugar mechanism, in the mechanism of fat storage and similar and can lead to severe obesity in very rare cases of genetic defects. Critics that are professionals in the obesity genetics talk about more than 100 genes. Most of these genes can trigger a strong/pathological disposition for obesity. If one would only test those 100 genes (and here there are probably a few more, not yet discovered genes, that also play a role), one could make a relative precise statement on the genetic disposition for obesity. But that's it. One can state: You have a strong genetic disposition for obesity. More information or use of such an analysis is not possible. Most critics unfortunately don't understand that we are not interested in our disposition for obesity (often the mirror can tell us that), but how our body reacts on environmental influences. Currently, there are eight relevant genetic variations that play a role.
"Depending on genetics, the calorie reduction is set higher (then there is less physical activity) or lower (then there is more physical activity). If the calorie reduction is 400 kcal, for example, and the basal metabolic rate without physical activity is 1500 kcal, the following is the calculation:
1) You take the basal metabolic rate at the target weight, which is often lower than the current basal metabolic rate. For example: 1300 kcal, and then you add the physical activity to maintain the weight to that, for example 100 kcal = 1400 kcal.
2) You then divide this number into 20 items to determine the amount of calories per article. In this case, that would be: 1400 kcal/20 = 70 kcal.
3) Then you take the current basal metabolic rate and subtract the calorie reduction: 1500-400 = 1100 kcal.
4) Then you calculate how many items that would correspond to: 1100/70 = 15.7 items = 16 items to lose weight.
5) So this means: 16 items to lose weight, 20 to maintain the weight, and the two adaptation weeks will be values in between 16 an 20. "
Neither more nor less. It is a combination of genes and environment that makes the influence. An easy example: lactose intolerance, a genetical disease. Because of a gene defect, lactose/milk cannot be processed. The gene defect itself does not cause any symptoms as long as the environment does not provide any milk. Otherwise, milk alone does not cause any problems as long as there is no gene defect. You cannot tell which one is more important: the gene defect or the environment. It is the (wrong) combination of both. And exactly this is the chance. We know how the genes look like and can form the environment accordingly to neutralize the problem of the genes (don`t drink lactose).
Although the program is based on more than 200 independent studies of various universities, we have conducted our own study about the effectivity. The study is not yet published. That is why we cannot name the sources. We already mentioned that the result was a 2.4-fold higher rate of weight loss than in a standard nutrition consultation according to the German agency for nutrition.
The so-called calorie balance is based on this. The concept always was: if 2000 kcal pass the lips and only 1500 are burnt you gain 500 kcal. From genetics, we only know that it is more complex. Maybe these 500 extra calories are fat and the body does not absorb them in the first place because of the genetical regulation. This we saw clearly in the study about the fat susceptibility. Also, a calorie deficit because of sport is not the same in all people. From genetics, we know (and fitness center owner confirm this with regularity) that when two friends go to the fitness center together to lose weight, and they do the same sport activities, the success can vary up to a factor of three. For every kilo one person loses the other one loses up to 3 kg. On the paper calculated, one might assume, that both created the same calorie deficit as they used up the same number of calories on the machines. The same it is with less food. Some people stay energized and use the energy effectively from the battery. Others change from food processing to a save mode and lower the base turnover and thereby the number of calories they use up through the day. Because of the save mode, effectivity of the weight loss is reduced.
Mostly positive with a few negative information. Here, I would like to suggest that you check the respective reviews:
In principle, we analyze eight genes, which leads to 6561 different genetic profiles. For each person, there is an independent variation in the areas:
• Fat sensitivity
• Carbohydrate sensitivity
• Intensity of the feeling of hunger
• Intensity of the feeling of fullness
• Tendency to eat rich in calories
• Tendency to snack
• Strength of the yo-yo effect
• Tendency to store fat around the organs
• Effectiveness of sports to lose weight
• Effectiveness of reduction of calories to lose weight
• Tendency to lose muscle mass
From the bars, there are 6561 different possible results, therefore practically every person has his/her own unique result. In addition, the numbers in the booklet are adjusted to body weight and metabolic rate, so there are indeed infinitely more different booklet variations.
Looking only at the nutrition distribution, we arrive at eight different types:
However, the diet is then also heavily influenced by the metabolic rate as well as the relation between weight loss due to reduced calories and weight loss due to sports. Therefore, practically everybody eats differently, even if several people have a distribution of macro-nutrients of, for example, 49%/ 31%/ 20%.