"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Nope, simply observation over time, knowing from labor statistics the
kinds of jobs we have now compared to 30 or 40 years ago. We have fewer
farm, manufacturing, heavy labor, etc., jobs and more desk jobs, service
jobs, etc. Also, I've yet to see any evidence that humans have evolved
genetically in a dramatic way in such a short period of time.
snip

Oh Yeah! We're the FIRST generation to have Michael Jackson! :0) :-)

Seriously, though I'm not disputing that environmental factors are
important. At the same time I cannot discount the other factors the article.
Those other things: genetic disposition to different metabolic rates, leptin
resistance, leptin levels, increased triglycerides, a virus previously
unknown - may have always been there and are just now being investigated.

If the changes you mention have come in the last 30 to 40 years, they may be
the "last straw" - not the "only straw".

I don't want to stray into social issues such as the trend to assign blame.
I don't think discussion of that would be productive whether I agree with
you or not. Likewise with the subject Mr. Reed raises about "the vast
majority of the overweight people I know are simply
unwilling to make the changes in their eating and lifestyle needed . . ." I
am interested in seeing further research done which will facilitate the
changes necessary for that "vast majority" (myself included) enabling them
to *become* willing.

Fifteen years ago, thanks to the help of nicotine patches, I quit a
thirty-year smoking habit. It is likely that I would have failed without the
patch. Let us fight the overweight epidemic with all of our weapons and
find new ones. Let's not give up on that vast majority by labeling them weak
or unwilling. There may or not be a patch for them, but why not look for
one?

I gotta go get some coffee. I just reread what I wrote am I'm not even sure
what I said. Mebbe you can figger out what I mean, though.

Ciao,
Rich S.