Department of Neurobiology and Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Cell Metab. 2023 May 2;35(5):737-741. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2023.03.020. Epub 2023 Apr 21.
The increased prevalence of obesity in recent decades is a topic of great scientific and medical interest, but despite many advances, the causes of this increase have not been adequately identified. In this context, two conflicting models for obesity-the carbohydrate-insulin model (CIM) and the energy balance model (EBM)-are being vigorously debated by distinct cohorts of experts in the field. The goal of this perspective is to assess this "conflict of models" from a neutral perspective. I conclude that although both models have produced useful insights, they differ fundamentally in what they seek to explain, and neither has yet provided a validated mechanistic account for the rising obesity prevalence in some but not all members of the population. Rather than engaging in such debates over competing models, the field should be more focused on establishing specific mechanistic insights in identified patient groups and, eventually, actionable interventions based on them.
近几十年来,肥胖症的患病率不断上升,这是一个备受科学界和医学界关注的话题。尽管已经取得了许多进展,但肥胖症发病率上升的原因仍未得到充分阐明。在这种背景下,两种相互矛盾的肥胖模型——碳水化合物-胰岛素模型(CIM)和能量平衡模型(EBM)——正在该领域的不同专家群体中激烈争论。本文旨在从中立的角度评估这种“模型冲突”。我得出的结论是,尽管这两种模型都产生了有用的见解,但它们在试图解释的问题上存在根本差异,而且这两种模型都没有为某些人群而非所有人群的肥胖症患病率上升提供经过验证的机制解释。因此,该领域不应再纠缠于相互竞争的模型,而应更加专注于在已确定的患者群体中建立具体的机制见解,并最终在此基础上提出可行的干预措施。