New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2021 Dec 1;114(6):1873-1885. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqab270.
According to a commonly held view, the obesity pandemic is caused by overconsumption of modern, highly palatable, energy-dense processed foods, exacerbated by a sedentary lifestyle. However, obesity rates remain at historic highs, despite a persistent focus on eating less and moving more, as guided by the energy balance model (EBM). This public health failure may arise from a fundamental limitation of the EBM itself. Conceptualizing obesity as a disorder of energy balance restates a principle of physics without considering the biological mechanisms that promote weight gain. An alternative paradigm, the carbohydrate-insulin model (CIM), proposes a reversal of causal direction. According to the CIM, increasing fat deposition in the body-resulting from the hormonal responses to a high-glycemic-load diet-drives positive energy balance. The CIM provides a conceptual framework with testable hypotheses for how various modifiable factors influence energy balance and fat storage. Rigorous research is needed to compare the validity of these 2 models, which have substantially different implications for obesity management, and to generate new models that best encompass the evidence.
根据普遍观点,肥胖大流行是由现代高可口、高能量加工食品的过度消费引起的,加上久坐不动的生活方式,情况更加恶化。然而,尽管一直遵循能量平衡模型(EBM)的“少吃多动”原则,肥胖率仍处于历史高位。这种公共卫生的失败可能源于 EBM 本身的一个根本局限性。将肥胖概念化为能量平衡的紊乱,只是重申了物理学的一个原理,而没有考虑促进体重增加的生物学机制。另一种模式,即碳水化合物-胰岛素模型(CIM),提出了因果关系的反转。根据 CIM,身体中脂肪的沉积增加——这是对高血糖负荷饮食的激素反应的结果——导致了正的能量平衡。CIM 为各种可改变因素如何影响能量平衡和脂肪储存提供了一个具有可检验假设的概念框架。需要进行严格的研究来比较这两种模型的有效性,这两种模型对肥胖管理有截然不同的影响,并产生能更好地包含证据的新模型。