Yet another good reason to live in the mountains

[ski diva]

And you thought it was only about the skiing:

From Outside Online:

A new study published in PLOS ONE says overweight U.S. service members are 41 percent less likely to transition into obesity when stationed at high altitude.

Largely a response to recent studies that suggest hypoxia can decrease food consumption and cause weight loss, the six-year project monitored some 100,000 active U.S. Army and Air Force service members with no prior diagnosis of obesity since enlisting.

According to the study, research in cities across the United States suggests that low altitude contributes to new cases of obesity. The inverse may be true as well.

Boulder, Colorado, at an elevation of 5,430 feet, just topped the list of the thinnest cities in the United States, and low-altitude obesity rates within the military present an even stronger case.

"This is the strongest evidence to date that moving to high altitude provides long-term obesity protection," Captain Jameson Voss, the study's lead author, told ScienceDaily.

 

[abc]

But the next city that has the second lowest obesity score...... Naples, Florida, AT SEA LEVEL!!!

So much for the "scientific" nonsense! More like selective data to support a preconcieved theory.

I can't believe they even "publish" it on a megazine. How stupid do they think their readers are?

 

[pinto]

Well, this isn't the only study that suggests this. For example,

https://www.livescience.com/6051-obese-people-lose-weight-high-altitudes.html

Here's a possible future diet tip: Move to a mountaintop.
In a recent study, obese individuals who spent time at a mountain facility at high altitudes lost weight without going on a diet. And they kept the pounds off for at least four weeks once they returned to normal altitudes.

The researchers suspect part of the weight loss can be attributed to the thin air, which may have decreased participants' appetites and increased their metabolism, meaning they burned more calories sans a workout. While at high altitudes, the obese subjects also showed an increase in levels of leptin, a hormone that when present can make one feel full.

But don't head for the hills just yet — these findings are very preliminary and were only tested in a small sample of people. Further research is needed to confirm the weight-loss effect, and understand why it may occur.

The study is detailed in the Feb. 4 issue of the journal Obesity.

Mountain living

Previous research has found that people tend to lose weight at high altitudes. But most of these studies were done in athletes and hikers who engaged in lots of physical activity.

But would the same effect hold true for obese subjects who were relatively sedentary?

To find out, Dr. Florian Lippl, of Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany, and his colleagues enrolled 20 obese male participants, with an average weight of 230 pounds (105 kg). They monitored the subjects for one week at low altitudes, looking at what they ate, and how much they walked. Then, the participants spent two weeks in an air-conditioned research facility, located on a mountain at about 8,700 feet (2,650 m) above sea level.

The participants had no restrictions in what they could eat, but they weren't allowed to exercise rigorously. After their stay, the subjects were brought down to normal altitude, and followed up for four weeks.

On average, the participants lost about 3.3 pounds (1.5 kg) while at altitude, Lippl said. This decrease might not seem like much, but it was statistically significant compared with the starting weight.

The researchers think some of the loss can be explained by the fact that the subjects naturally ate less on the mountain, cutting back by 734 calories per day on average.

But a change in diet alone couldn't account for all of the weight loss. The researchers think some of the decrease had to do with a bump in metabolism. On average, the participants' metabolism increased, meaning their bodies burned more calories at rest, without requiring extra movement.

The hunger hormone

In the case of this study, there may be a physiological reason why the participants ate less.

The researchers measured levels of a hormone called leptin, which plays a role in controlling appetite. An increase in your leptin levels means you feel full, while a decrease makes you hungry. Since the obese subjects showed a general increase in there leptin levels at altitude, the researchers say this "hunger hormone" could have been a factor.

Though Lippl and colleagues aren't sure why leptin levels increased on the mountain, they speculate the thin air may have something to do with it. Studies have shown that when human cells are put in a low-oxygen environment (similar to the air at high altitude) they produce more leptin.

Holidays in the mountains

Interestingly, the participants maintained their reduced weight after they had returned to normal altitude and stayed there for four weeks, a finding the researchers did not expect.

But the subjects walked a little bit more, which may have helped keep off the pounds. The researchers aren't sure about the cause of this extra activity, but they think it may be related to the high altitude "training effect," the performance boost athletes experience when they train at high altitudes and race closer to sea level, Lippl told LiveScience.

Without the stress of the low-oxygen, mountain environment, the obese patients may have felt fitter, and were able to exert themselves more, Lippl said.

So could future diet regimes involve skiing vacations?

"With a little humor, I tell my patients now, if they want to take holidays, they should think of mountain holidays [rather] than spending their holidays at the sea," Lippl said.

But in seriousness, Lippl says, the study is really a starting point for further research.He plans to do another study involving more participants over a longer period of time to see if mountain stays can help promote long lasting weight loss.

 

[abc]

the subjects walked a little bit more, which may have helped keep off the pounds. The researchers aren't sure about the cause of this extra activity, but they think it may be related to the high altitude "training effect," the performance boost athletes experience when they train at high altitudes and race closer to sea level, Lippl told LiveScience.

Without the stress of the low-oxygen, mountain environment, the obese patients may have felt fitter, and were able to exert themselves more, Lippl said.[

I would say that's quite true for even the non-obese! But the key might be the TWO weeks in the mountains. 1 week just doesn't do it.

Today, I was carrying my skis back to my car, which was parked at the far end of the parking lot. Normally, I'm quite a whimp when it comes to carrying all my crap. I would walk empty handed to the car, drive back to pick up the skis and boots. But today, I just walked, walked, and walked some more.

That's when I also realized I skied 5 hrs without break. And I didn't even feel tired. (I was only annoyed they close the lift at 4 as usual)

I returned from Colorado 3 days ago, after spending 2 weeks there. I've never noticed such improvement of my fitness following past trips, all of them usually 1 week long only.

 

[mustski]

But the next city that has the second lowest obesity score...... Naples, Florida, AT SEA LEVEL!!!

There is definitely a "swimsuit effect" from living at the coast in a year round beach climate. The body beautiful is worshipped in SoCal also and there is a definite emphasis on fitness. I would guess that mountain living has a similar effect. I don't mean so much the "body beautiful" as a natural increase in activity from walking up and down hill everywhere you go.

Well, this isn't the only study that suggests this. For example,

https://www.livescience.com/6051-obese-people-lose-weight-high-altitudes.html

Here's a possible future diet tip: Move to a mountaintop.
In a recent study, obese individuals who spent time at a mountain facility at high altitudes lost weight without going on a diet. And they kept the pounds off for at least four weeks once they returned to normal altitudes.


Previous research has found that people tend to lose weight at high altitudes. But most of these studies were done in athletes and hikers who engaged in lots of physical activity.

But would the same effect hold true for obese subjects who were relatively sedentary?

To find out, Dr. Florian Lippl, of Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany, and his colleagues enrolled 20 obese male participants, with an average weight of 230 pounds (105 kg). They monitored the subjects for one week at low altitudes, looking at what they ate, and how much they walked. Then, the participants spent two weeks in an air-conditioned research facility, located on a mountain at about 8,700 feet (2,650 m) above sea level.

The participants had no restrictions in what they could eat, but they weren't allowed to exercise rigorously. After their stay, the subjects were brought down to normal altitude, and followed up for four weeks.

On average, the participants lost about 3.3 pounds (1.5 kg) while at altitude, Lippl said. This decrease might not seem like much, but it was statistically significant compared with the starting weight.

The researchers think some of the loss can be explained by the fact that the subjects naturally ate less on the mountain, cutting back by 734 calories per day on average.

But a change in diet alone couldn't account for all of the weight loss. The researchers think some of the decrease had to do with a bump in metabolism. On average, the participants' metabolism increased, meaning their bodies burned more calories at rest, without requiring extra movement.

The researchers aren't sure about the cause of this extra activity, but they think it may be related to the high altitude "training effect," the performance boost athletes experience when they train at high altitudes and race closer to sea level, Lippl told LiveScience.

Our local cross country teams, head to the mountains for a couple of weeks of training every summer. The same work out at altitude requires more effort. Even a casual stroll at altitude becomes a work out for those unaccustomed to it.

 

[bounceswoosh]

I lose about five pounds any time I spend a whole week in the mountains to ski. I think it's a combo of intense exercise, cold weather (more energy expended to keep warm), and less snacking than I do at the office. I don't know why these people in the study ate fewer calories, though. I get more of an appetite at altitude. Maybe it depends on whether you're acclimated. If I had altitude sickness, I doubt I'd have much of an appetite.

 

[pinto]

I lose about five pounds any time I spend a whole week in the mountains to ski. I think it's a combo of intense exercise, cold weather (more energy expended to keep warm), and less snacking than I do at the office. I don't know why these people in the study ate fewer calories, though. I get more of an appetite at altitude. Maybe it depends on whether you're acclimated. If I had altitude sickness, I doubt I'd have much of an appetite.

My appetite wanes at altitude, so that part makes sense to me. Actually a lot of the article rang true, which is one reason I posted it. But not everyone is the same, of course-- it was just interesting to see it in an actual study.

 

[bounceswoosh]

My appetite wanes at altitude, so that part makes sense to me. Actually a lot of the article rang true, which is one reason I posted it. But not everyone is the same, of course-- it was just interesting to see it in an actual study.

And to be fair, my estimation of my appetite is not exactly a scientific process ;-)

 

[abc]

I don't think my appetite is affect by the altitude. After the first few days when I was still adjusting to the altitude, my appetite typically goes back to normal.