Weight Science and Set Point Weight is Important
Our weight has been over simplified for decades, even centuries. We have been told that if we “just” eat less or eat “well” and exercise more, we will be a “healthy” weight. The more I look into the science behind these thoughts and theories, the more I realise how much scientists have been running towards the wrong things this whole time. When we look at weight science evidence, the research, I find one main and common problem.
THEY WILL ASSUME WE NEED TO END THE OB*SITY EDIPEMIC.
The assumptions being that is purely fat that causes health problems. The reason why this assumption is made is because of anti fatness (which comes from anti blackness) and the key here is that it is far easier and cheaper for governments to make weight an individual responsibility.
To remind those of you who may be new to this, weight isn’t just about what we eat or how much we eat and how much we exercise. The mechanisms are far more complicated and involved things that we are way out of our control, include socioeconomics and our genetics (yes, our weight does get passed down in our DNA).
Some ways that the anti-diet and Health at Every Size community tries to explain weight science is the set point theory. Set point theory is a small part of the weight science picture. We need to build up beyond what set point weight theory is to be able to understand how complicated our weight is.
Set Point Theory and the Evidence
When first diving into research, I like to see who’s writing about the topic. Set point weight theory is typically spoken of alot by dieting companies as a way that they are different. They have the diet that will last long term! Spoiler alert – they don’t and we will discuss that.
If you look around when you are out shopping, or just around people, our bodies vary wildly. We are supposed to vary. That is normal. And I don’t think it is out of the question to speculate that most fat people are supposed to be fat. I say “most” because we cannot say that all people are supposed to be fat (I would never encourage intentional weight loss). Like people of any size are just supposed to be what they weigh. That variation is normal. If it wasn’t for the anti fat research that assumes that fat=bad/unhealthy, we would be just able to live life.
When I think about Set point weight theory on it’s own, it kind of gives me the “ick”. It is a real watering down of weight science. The simplified explanations being shared doesn’t allow for the expansion of “WOW isn’t our weight incredibly complex”. And I feel that people need to know that expansion and how much we do not actually know about our weight.
Set Point Weight as a Definition
Set point weight theory cannot be the only way to define weight BECAUSE it is so complicated. The simple explanation is that set point weight theory is where your body has a defined weight it wants to be. Translated into our lives, it explains why when we stop dieting, that we regain the weight and allows for the explanation that our body overshoots our set point weight so we end up heavier than what we were before the diet.
Yes it is a nice neat explanation. But it doesn’t take on board the fact that we tend to put on weight throughout our lives. In 10 years, research has found that we gain 6.7kg over that time. We are supposed to gain weight throughout our lives but where does that sit in set point theory?
What Influences our Weight? Here is the Weight Science!
We know that weight is impacted by so many things. It is one theory in a hell of a lot of evidence that goes far wider than the explanation we have from set point theory.
Genetics influences our weight by around 50-90%, which has been shown by twin, family and adoption studies. There are ongoing studies trying to isolate the genes that may cause fatness or the genes that may be switched on or off which may cause fatness. We also know that our Basal metabolic rate (BMR) has an impact. Stress and trauma. Hormone status, socio economics, finances, access to healthcare, education, marginalisation and oppression. All of these impact our weight.
Arguments over Set Point Weight
Looking more towards set point weight theory. Interestingly this theory was first theorised in the 1950s and has been discussed through a number of mechanisms since. Interestingly it is one that scientists have been 50/50 about. They explored the Glucostatic (the role of sugar and food intake) in relation to set point theory and that did not work out then also explored the “lipostatic” (the role of body fat and food intake) on which also did not work out. But when I say, did not work out, I mean in finding out if these mechanisms uphold the weight centric view of set point theory which is that noone’s body would ever be fat and that all bodies want to be in the “normal” range in terms of BMI.
This is why the scientific community is on the fence. The evidence they have of mechanisms that change our food intake either through sugar in our body or fat body. Both do not change food intake and also do not change body composition or weight. But in a round about way, they are showing that in their exploration that food intake does not have a long term impact on weight or body composition.
This makes me laugh also because the “lipostatic” mechanism was the exploration on leptin and it’s impact on our weight. Leptin is used in our body to regulate appetite and fat storage and there are so many people on social media trying to tell people how to “fix leptin resistance” and also take control of leptin for weight loss when the evidence shows that leptin levels do not impact our weight in the simplified way they think it does and leptin resistance is incredibly rare. Totally off topic but a gem there.
Set Point Theory is Hard to Prove
Set point theory is a hard thing to prove as weight science is so nuanced and so difficult to measure. I think the best and most recent research that goes towards confirming set point theory as part of weight science are the studies done around the weight loss drug. The research shows that even while still using the drug, the initial weight loss is only short term. Before 1 year of using the weight loss drug, people tend to start gaining weight again. This is shown in their actual research themselves.
Can we “Reset” Set Point Weight?
But I also want to point out that there are other theories that are spoken about in regards to weight regulation. They are all fairly similar and we have no way to say that any of them are 100% right or 100% wrong. We don’t have research to show that set point weight can be “reset”. There is a lot of evidence that shows that set point can and does increase just over time but also any time of weight loss that is short lived, your set point weight may go up. We see that through weight cycling (yo yo dieting) and lived experience. That is a real thing.
I had an argument about this with a PT who was mad that I challenged him telling people on his Instagram account that he has the magic solution to reducing a person set point weight. A quick check and he is still using this as part of his “missions”. He didn’t like I had research to back up what I was saying while he screaming “BUT I’VE HELPED SO MANY PEOPLE SO I KNOW SET POINT CAN CHANGE”. When I asked him how often he followed up on his ex-clients and for how long after wards, he ended up blocking me because he knew I was right.
Resetting set point weight is sold by people selling weight loss and I literally cannot find one study to confirm or even discuss the truth in this. The only thing that comes close is an opinion piece on how the weight loss drug could be used to “reset” set point weight by using a maintenance dose of the drug, for life. A drug that has also shown that people end up putting weight on before the year is up and also comes with horrendous daily side effects. Even though this is just opinion, it is being spoken about as fact and diets are selling this fact such as the one below that talks about set point weight theory.
Weight and Health are only Correlated
In saying all of this, with just focusing on weight not being fully in our control like we are sold, we lose sight of something more important. We lose sight of the fact that we should be able to simply exist as humans and treated with common decency no matter our size.
In the ideal world, we wouldn’t have to understand weight science to help us challenge our own internalised anti fatness. Because we would just be a variation of human, neutral. We shouldn’t have to persuade strangers that we are fat and we don’t chose to be so their advise of eating less and exercising more with a dose of pity or the comments from people about our health with anger is completely unwarranted. We don’t need comments, pity, anger or any kind of emotion just for existing. Not only that, but it also it exhausting trying to justify our fatness and explaining our health to complete strangers.
And on that note, we also should not use health to justify our fatness, someone healthy or unhealthy are still deserving of human decency, regardless of weight.
Weight science is a topic that is always developing and evolving. In 5 years time I will probably revisit and there will be extra research that takes us in another direction completely. There is work going on all around the world because of the rhetoric that fatness needs curing. I wonder if research that takes on a different view would actually find something more ground breaking in understanding our bodies, not for weight loss but for other much more useful things. What would more would we find out? Would we be heading towards a weight inclusive way of treating people?
