Faidon Magkos, Thorkild I. A. Sørensen, David Raubenheimer, Nikhil V. Dhurandhar, Ruth J. F. Loos, Anja Bosy-Westphal, Christoffer Clemmensen, Mads F. Hjorth, David B. Allison, Gary Taubes, Eric Ravussin, Mark I. Friedman, Kevin D. Hall, David S. Ludwig, John R. Speakman, Arne Astrup
{"title":"On the pathogenesis of obesity: causal models and missing pieces of the puzzle","authors":"Faidon Magkos, Thorkild I. A. Sørensen, David Raubenheimer, Nikhil V. Dhurandhar, Ruth J. F. Loos, Anja Bosy-Westphal, Christoffer Clemmensen, Mads F. Hjorth, David B. Allison, Gary Taubes, Eric Ravussin, Mark I. Friedman, Kevin D. Hall, David S. Ludwig, John R. Speakman, Arne Astrup","doi":"10.1038/s42255-024-01106-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Application of the physical laws of energy and mass conservation at the whole-body level is not necessarily informative about causal mechanisms of weight gain and the development of obesity. The energy balance model (EBM) and the carbohydrate–insulin model (CIM) are two plausible theories, among several others, attempting to explain why obesity develops within an overall common physiological framework of regulation of human energy metabolism. These models have been used to explain the pathogenesis of obesity in individuals as well as the dramatic increases in the prevalence of obesity worldwide over the past half century. Here, we summarize outcomes of a recent workshop in Copenhagen that brought together obesity experts from around the world to discuss causal models of obesity pathogenesis. These discussions helped to operationally define commonly used terms; delineate the structure of each model, particularly focussing on areas of overlap and divergence; challenge ideas about the importance of purported causal factors for weight gain; and brainstorm on the key scientific questions that need to be answered. We hope that more experimental research in nutrition and other related fields, and more testing of the models and their predictions will pave the way and provide more answers about the pathogenesis of obesity than those currently available. This authoritative Perspective lays a foundation for the field of obesity research by comparing commonalities and differences between competing models of obesity pathogenesis and by defining terms that are at the core of this discussion.","PeriodicalId":19038,"journal":{"name":"Nature metabolism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":18.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42255-024-01106-8.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42255-024-01106-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Application of the physical laws of energy and mass conservation at the whole-body level is not necessarily informative about causal mechanisms of weight gain and the development of obesity. The energy balance model (EBM) and the carbohydrate–insulin model (CIM) are two plausible theories, among several others, attempting to explain why obesity develops within an overall common physiological framework of regulation of human energy metabolism. These models have been used to explain the pathogenesis of obesity in individuals as well as the dramatic increases in the prevalence of obesity worldwide over the past half century. Here, we summarize outcomes of a recent workshop in Copenhagen that brought together obesity experts from around the world to discuss causal models of obesity pathogenesis. These discussions helped to operationally define commonly used terms; delineate the structure of each model, particularly focussing on areas of overlap and divergence; challenge ideas about the importance of purported causal factors for weight gain; and brainstorm on the key scientific questions that need to be answered. We hope that more experimental research in nutrition and other related fields, and more testing of the models and their predictions will pave the way and provide more answers about the pathogenesis of obesity than those currently available. This authoritative Perspective lays a foundation for the field of obesity research by comparing commonalities and differences between competing models of obesity pathogenesis and by defining terms that are at the core of this discussion.
期刊介绍:
Nature Metabolism is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that covers a broad range of topics in metabolism research. It aims to advance the understanding of metabolic and homeostatic processes at a cellular and physiological level. The journal publishes research from various fields, including fundamental cell biology, basic biomedical and translational research, and integrative physiology. It focuses on how cellular metabolism affects cellular function, the physiology and homeostasis of organs and tissues, and the regulation of organismal energy homeostasis. It also investigates the molecular pathophysiology of metabolic diseases such as diabetes and obesity, as well as their treatment. Nature Metabolism follows the standards of other Nature-branded journals, with a dedicated team of professional editors, rigorous peer-review process, high standards of copy-editing and production, swift publication, and editorial independence. The journal has a high impact factor, has a certain influence in the international area, and is deeply concerned and cited by the majority of scholars.