Basic theory of getting fat

Misunderstanding of the relationship between diet, exercise and body weight




  Many of those who do sports are thin. When we see athletes who gained weight after quitting sports, the formula of “exercise=losing weight” may seem to work. (Though many specialists think in this way, this is a superficial understanding such as geocentrism.)


  The relation between exercise and body weight can’t be so simple.
However, with my 3 basis, relationship between diet, exercise and body weight becomes much easier to explain:

  (1) each has the function to maintain present condition
  (2) the word “getting fat” has 2 meanings
  (3) the level of present condition increases with intestinal starvation mechanism.

1. “Diet” and “exercise” are the useful pretext for specialists.

  Specialists (doctor etc) would say “Aren’t you still eating too much...?” to those who didn’t lose weight despite exercise and “your exercise may not be enough...” to those who can’t lose weight despite calorie restriction (those who get fat even though they don’t eat much).


  That is to say, since the relation of diet and exercise were regarded as “calories- in / calories- out”, it was used as a various pretext by specialists and no one really considered this relation deeply.

2. Consumed energy would be regained

  I repeat but those who believe that “eat more and you’ll get fat /exercise more and you’ll lose weight” are seeing things in this way . They are thinking that “intake and consumption are opposite and the difference of them would result to getting fat (or losing weight)”.

(figure below)


However, it’s actually like this.


  Intake amount (A) and consumption amount (C) is mediated by the power of absorption. Therefore, as the consumption amount (C) increases, appetite and absorption amount (B) would increase relatively.

【Please refer here for detail】
If there is no need to exercise to lose weight….

  Also, the increase of intake amount (A) not automatically increases absorption amount (B). Though exercise do consume energy once, there will be reaction to regain consumed energy.

【Please refer here for detail】
There is no meaning in simply calculating calories

  Here is some kind of a law that “consumed energy would be regained”. It’s the same thing as your hands become hot after playing with cold snow.


  On the other hand, if you don’t use it, it will decay (both body and brain). If you break your leg and won’t move it, it will get extremely thin... it’s the same thing. That is to say, exercise basically revives the body, regains the circle of energy and tries to store energy so it’s a power that accelerates to the direction of getting fat (storing fat) (it’s especially the case for muscle loading exercise such as exercise without oxygen). However, whether you get fat or not depends on how you take “diet”.

“Diet” is always the priority.

  This is why false sense of “not getting fat as long as doing exercise” emerges.

3. What does it mean that “diet” is the priority?

First, I want to explain by each pattern.

(1) Not getting weight while doing exercise

  As Dr. John Briffa, the author of "escape the diet trap", says, the perspective that “originally thin people starts marathon and football and become athletes” is a crooked but righteous view.


  Those who do exercise pay attention to nutrition and take nutritional supplement other than 3 meals. It’s because we think “I have to take nutrition” or “I have to eat properly” when I do exercise. In other words, originally thin people doing sports such as football and marathon and taking 3 proper meals per day would be difficult to get fat (since there is no intestinal starvation mechanism).

  Their misunderstanding is that they believe “I don’t get fat even if I eat because I’m consuming” or “I don’t get fat even if I eat because I have high metabolism”. “Consuming” is not completely wrong but taking well-balanced meals actually has more meaning.

(2) Getting fat without exercise

  On the other hand, there are people who say they got fat after quitting exercise or more desk work and less exercise …


  However, the problem is rather skipping meal/ taking light meal, taking an unbalanced diet (with much carbohydrate) or taking meals at irregular rhythm.
 This would easily cause starvation mechanism. When we have  nothing to do or stay at the desk a whole day, we tend to think “we should take a light meal”. We may skip breakfast or take something light for lunch. We may take only a hot-dog in order to save calorie or money for the dinner with colleagues.


  In such situation, starvation mechanism tends to occur and in a long-term, we get fat. There are people who say “though I didn’t get fat when I was young even if I eat a lot, recently I don’t do exercise so I’m getting fat....” but in other word, it means that “I didn’t get fat when I was young since I took proper diet but now I take simple meal (with less vegetable) and tolerate hunger so I’m getting fat”.

■ My friend from university used to be very thin even though he took fried dish and meat (and of course, a lot of rice) in order to get fat during his years in high school when he was participating to Judo club.


  However, he got fat more than 10kg in just a year while he was preparing for the entrance exam (he ate more when he was in the club). He said it was because he didn’t do any exercise but even study uses calorie in brain.
  When I asked the detail, it seemed the most part of the daily diet, even more than the half, was something easy to eat such as rice ball, snack bread or instant noodle.


(3)Get fat while doing exercise

  Though fighters and Sumo wrestlers
(Japanese national sports) do exercise, they need to increase their weight due to the characteristics of the sports. However, we often hear that even if they take protein other than 3 meals per day in order to get more muscle and increase weight, it’s difficult.
  On the other hand, those who don’t want to get fat, get fat easily. This is because intestinal starvation mechanism is necessary in order to gain weight. Those who do hard exercise think they need to take sufficient nutrition (milk product, protein, fat, vegetables etc.) but those who don’t do exercise tend to eat lightly.
  Exercise is a power accelerating to the direction of getting fat but if you take meal and protein every 4 or 5 hours in order to get fat, the starvation mechanism won’t occur making it difficult to gain weight.


  Sumo wrestler is famous for being fat but they eat only twice a day and they eat Chanko (stewed meat and vegetables) which is easy to digest with rice so we can see that they are directing “the power to get fat” and “starvation mechanism” to the same direction.
  That is to say, it’s very logical in view of gaining weight.


(1)Exercise is a power accelerating to the direction of getting fat. (especially muscle training is for those who want to get fat or increase power)

(2) However, the priority is in how to take “diet”. The way of diet decides whether we get fat or not (taking foods with small intervals makes it difficult to get fat)

(3) Though proper exercise is necessary for health, but it’s not indispensable for losing weight. You can lose weight only by changing the way you take diet.




Change the perspective from “taking too much calories is the cause of getting fat”



1.Why do we get fat in the first place?

  If we are to think in the simplest way, body fat could be considered as a mechanism of “preparation for starvation”. Our ancestors were living difficult life and they had to survive time without food. They didn’t know when they could eat the next time. Storing extra nutrition when eating is the proper mechanism of the body.


  However, this idea was denied long time ago by researchers… because fat people eat a lot. When we imagine a typical fat type “who are fat, eat a lot and won’t do exercise”, it may be natural that people can’t think body fat as “preparation for starvation”.


  However, I want to explain through this blog as a whole, why body fat are the “preparation for starvation” using word of “intestinal starvation” and “relativeness”.


  First, I would like to explain the mechanism of our brain.

(reference: “Read in bookstore!” by Hideto Tomachi)
  The brain has antenna that would access only to things it recognizes (RAS: Reticular Activating System). “Law of attraction” is one of the way to explain RAS. When we think “I want new PC”, you will notice PC manufacturer’s pub which you didn’t notice before.


  It’s the mechanism of brain to collect information of only “what you want” since the brain would burn out if it has access to all information. However, this RAS has a weak point. It accepts information that are important so it means, it refuses other information by filter. That is to say, there is psychological blindness (Scotoma) in which we focus too much on one information and can’t see others.

* focus on the move of the white team and count the number of pass of the white team.

3.What we can see by changing perspective

  Therefore, if we have fixed idea of “calorie makes us fat”, “eating a lot makes us fat”, “fat makes us fat”, we pay attention only on the act of eating. And this is scotoma where we can’t see other perspectives. If we think stored body fat as “preparation for starvation”, we should be able to see the back side that those who got fat were tolerating more hunger.

For example,

♦ “those who got fat by eating late at night” may have tolerated hunger after lunch to 9 or 10 o’clock at night.


♦ Before you say “I got fat by eating from stress”, did you have time when you couldn’t eat due to stress?

♦ Have you skipped lunch or had something light because you had the rest of the breakfast of children?

♦ Tolerating hunger while doing diet is one thing but a cake we eat rarely makes us fat is not logical.

♦ Those who say “Regardless of the intake amount, I didn’t get fat when I was young...” are limiting their meals or tolerating hunger having only light meal.

♦ Working person who says who got fat by having alcohol at night may have taken light lunch or no breakfast.


♦ Getting fat after having child may be that she felt so dizzy that she couldn’t eat even though her body is working hard to have baby (though I can’t understand since I’m a man)

  Once you get fat, please look from the perspective that “hunger (intestinal starvation more strictly) is the cause of getting fat”. Then, you should be able to see something different.




”Absorption amount” should be put more emphasis on



1.Is there a meaning in comparing only intake amount?

  Is there a meaning in comparing “consumed calories” with intake amount and intake calories? We can’t see how many calories we consume. Nutrition are absorbed in intestine so we can never see regardless of how many calories we take. However, the intake amount (intake calories) is always compared. What is important is the “absorbed amount”.
 (Though it might be a theory that is difficult to understand for those with average weight, I believe those with too much or too less weight would understand)


(Caution 1) “Absorption rate” differs by person with effect of such as digest rate
(Caution 2) “Absorption rate” may change by hunger, exercise, the way we eat so it’s not always the same for the same person

  I think trying to compare everything based on intake amount and intake calories are causing various distortion and contradiction. There are those who don’t eat much but fat or those who eat much but won’t get fat. It is true that often those who are fat eat a lot but it’s because

  (1) they have big body
  (2) their stomach and intestine are large and strong
  (3) they tolerated hunger for a long time

so they could “eat much”.


2.Absorbing capability differs by person

  As each of us have different ability to memorize, talk, run, make money or communicate, our ability “to digest” and “to absorb” are different by person.

  In Japan, there are old sayings such as
・get fat even by drinking water
・a thin eats a lot
・your body is inefficient (since you don’t get fat even if you eat a lot)
・my body is efficient (get fat easily).


  I believe these all represent “absorption rate” explained here. Also, though I’m not sure how many % of people would agree, I want to say it loud that when we say “our body gets fat easily” or “our body won’t get fat”, it means not “good/bad metabolism” but rather “absorption rate”.


3.Is 1 calorie intake still be 1 calorie in the body?

  For example, it is know that calcium of small fish or iron of vegetable are difficult to absorb. It’s just not right to say simply “you took 2,000kcal today” just by adding intake amount only for calories. Is 1 calorie intake still be 1 calorie in the body? Those who say it’s 1 calorie in body use “the first law of thermodynamics” as its ground.


  "The first law states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In other words, energy can be converted from one form to another, but the total amount of energy in the universe remains constant. How might this law apply to weight management?
  Suppose someone has stable weight over time. The first law dictates that, in theory, the number of calories consumed by this individual in the form of food is equal to the calories the individual expends during metabolism and activity. In other words, 'calories in = calories out’. Applying the first law of thermodynamics essentially dismisses any notion that different forms of calorie consumed by an individual can have different effects on weight. In summary: ‘a calorie is a calorie.
  However, the first law of thermodynamics actually refers to what are known as ‘closed systems' – ones that can exchange heat and energy with their surroundings, but not matter.


  Is this true for human beings? Actually, no: the human body does indeed exchange matter with its surroundings, principally in the form of the food (matter in) and as waste products such as urine and faeces (matter out). Also, technically speaking, the first law refers to systems in which chemical reactions do not take place. 
  But the human body is essentially a mass of chemical reactions. So, here again, the first law of thermodynamics cannot apply where weight management is concerned." (PP.63-64)
(Citation from “escape the diet trap” by Dr. John Briffa)


4.My wish

  I have a reason I wanted to write such article. I felt this myself when I was extremely thin around 30kg due to extremely low absorption rate. At that time, I couldn’t gain weight regardless of what I ate. Though it was certainly pathologic, I though it was a problem of percentage of absorption rate.
  And though it was only once, I gained more than 3kg in a very short term (about 2 days) and I was able to feel the instant I get fat (this was also through intestine feeling). After that, when my weight recovered up to 50kg, I was able to keep the weight even if I don’t try to eat as much as I did before.

5.”Being thin due to high metabolism” is unnatural

  In Japan, it is often said that those who are thin won’t get fat “since their metabolism are high” or “since their body can break down body fat easily” etc. However, if body fat are saved as a preparation for starvation (since we don’t know when we could eat the next time), would the body break down or metabolize the precious energy source in vain?  If everyone absorb in the same way and “those who are thin are using extra energy by high metabolism”, isn’t it unnatural?


  It’s often said that getting muscle will improve metabolism but isn’t that because we are shown figure such as shaped up model? In fact, those who are thin has less muscle and those who are fat have more power with muscle under body fat. I believe it’s not only what I feel.
  However, it will lead to those who are fat have many muscle and are easy to get thin, and those who are thin have less muscle and are easy to get fat which are contradictory. This isn’t good for specialists such as doctor, nutritionist explain.

  This is the starting point and the core of my blog. All stories lead to here.




Wealthy ones get fat? Poor ones get fat?



  I want to tell you something interesting that is related to the content of my blog. At the end of this article, I will explain how it is related to my experience.

1.Though the wealthiness is said to be the cause of obesity...

 "Ever since researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) broke the news in the mid-1990s that the epidemic was upon us, authorities have blamed it on overeating and sedentary behavior and blamed those two factors on the relative wealth of modern societies.


In 2003
  "Improved prosperity" caused the epidemic, aided and abetted by the food and entertainment industries, as the New York University nutritionist Marion Nestle explained in the journal Science.

  The Yale University psychologist Kelly Brownell coined the term "toxic environment" to describe the same notion. Brownell says, live in a toxic environment "that encourages overeating and physical inactivity." Obesity is the natural consequence. (Cheeseburgers, French fries, super-sizes, soft drinks, computers, video games etc ) (P.17)


  The World Health Organization (WHO) uses the identical logic to explain the obesity epidemic worldwide, blaming it on rising incomes, urbanization, "shifts toward less physically demanding work...moves toward less physical activity...and more passive leisure pursuits." (P.18)
(Citation from “Why We Get Fat?” by Gary Taubes)

  In Japan, this idea is widely accepted and TV program, magazine on diet or majority of specialist explain that high-calorie food and less exercise are the cause of obesity.

2.The example of obesity in poverty

  However, what we have to consider here is that obesity is spreading in poor layer, too.

  "This was first reported in a survey of New Yorkers - midtown Manhattanites - in the early 1960s: obese women were six times more likely to be poor than rich; obese men, twice as likely.
  Can it be possible that the obesity epidemic is caused by prosperity, so the richer we get, the fatter we get, and that obesity associates with poverty, so the poorer we are, the more likely we are to be fat? (P.18)

  In the early 1970s, nutritionists and research-minded physicians would discuss the observations of high levels of obesity in these poor populations, and they would occasionally do so with an open mind as to the cause. This was a time when obesity was still considered a problem of "malnutrition" rather than "overnutrition" as it is today. (P.29)


  Between 1901 and 1905, two anthropologists independently studied the Pima (Native American tribe in Arizona), and both commented on how fat they were, particularly the women.

  What makes this observation so remarkable is that the Pima, at the time, had just gone from being among the most affluent Native American tribes to among the poorest.
  The Pima used to be hardworking farmers and hunters, so it is said, and now they're sedentary wage earners, like the rest of us, driving to the same fast-food restaurants, eating the same snacks, watching the same TV shows, and getting fat and diabetic just like the rest of us, only more so. The tribe was relying on government rations for day-to-day sustenance.
  Why would the Pima get fat on the abundant rations and not on the abundant food they'd had prior to the famines? Perhaps the answer lies in the type of food being consumed, a question of a quality rather than quantity. (PP.19-22)

  Two researchers from the University of Chicago studied another Native American tribe, the Sioux living on the South Dakota.Fifteen families, with thirty-two children among them, lived "chiefly on bread and coffee." This was poverty almost beyond our imagination today.
  Yet their obesity rates were not much different from what we have today in the midst of our epidemic. But the researchers noted another pertinent fact about these Sioux: one-fifth of the adult women, a quarter of the men, and a quarter of the children were "extremely thin."

  This combination of obesity and malnutrition or undernutrition (not enough calories) existing in the same populations is something that authorities today talk about as though it were a new phenomenon, but it's  not. Here we have malnutrition or undernutrition coexisting with obesity in the same population eighty years ago. "(PP.23-24)
(“Why We Get Fat?” by Gary Taubes )


  Groups with high obesity rate despite their poverty and undernutrition were found all over the world. Below are just few examples.

"1961-63: Trinidad, West Indies
  A team of nutritionists from the US reports that malnutrition is a serious medical problem on the island, but so is obesity.

1971: Rarotonga, the South Pacific
  40% of the adult women are obese; 25% are "grossly obese."

  This is from a 2005 New England Journal of Medicine article, "A Nutrition Paradox - Underweight and Obesity in Developing Countries," written by Benjamin Caballero (Johns Hopkins University).

  Caballero then describes the difficulty that he believed this phenomenon presents: "The coexistence of underweight and overweight poses a challenge to public health programs, since the aims of programs to reduce undernutrition are obviously in conflict with those for obesity prevention.”
  Put simply, if we want to prevent obesity, we have to get people to eat less, but if we want to prevent undernutrition, we have to make more food available. What do we do? " (PP.30-31)
( Citation from “Why We Get Fat?” by Gary Taubes )

3.Though we say we became wealthy, how are the quality of our food?

  I want to explain my consideration based on 1 and 2.
 First of all, in order to consider “obesity”, isn’t it too simple to believe that “obesity increased since we became wealthy”?  It is certain that our life is much freer and is wealthier in a sense that it’s filled with things.  If we have certain income, we can do what we like and eat what we want.
  However, when the income is low, we can’t spend a lot for food. Also, we don’t have enough time. We might disproportionately take too much carbohydrate like eating a toast and coffee for breakfast and burger or cup noodle for lunch. We might not take breakfast.


  In addition, those who get fat easily try to take simple light meal since they ate a lot the day before. The idea of offsetting over calories of yesterday by today is wrong.
  That is to say, even if they are said to be wealthy, in sense of food, there are many things in common with group with high rate of obesity with poverty. As Mr. Gary says, what is important now is the “quality” of food rather than the “quantity”.

4.Undernutrition and obesity can coexist

  I will explain that underweight and overweight can coexist concerning the previous content of “The coexistence of underweight and overweight poses a challenge to public health programs”.

  I repeat that when I was very thin about 30kg, at first I was taking a lot of high-calorie food but I couldn’t get fat. And then, I realized that I can gain weight by making “intestinal starvation”.
  The easiest way to make starvation was to take carbohydrate and good protein but since it lacks vegetable and mineral, I felt dizzy by undernutrition.  If I take milk, egg, vegetable, beans and fish to add nutrition and mineral, though nutrition is better, I couldn’t gain any weight. To me, it was because I couldn’t digest (those with healthy stomach should be able to digest).

  What is often said that “well-balanced food makes gain less weight” is in this sense.  The reason “diet with majority of carbohydrate or irregular rhythm make easier to gain weight” is the same as getting fat with poverty and undernutrition.


 "Not all of us get fat when we eat carbohydrates, but for those of us who do get fat, the carbohydrates are to blame; the fewer carbohydrates we eat, the leaner we will be. (p.134)
 These foods are also, almost invariably, the cheapest calories available. This is the conspicuous explanation for why the poorer we are, the fatter we're likely to be." (P.150)
(Citation from “Why We Get Fat?” by Gary Taubes)




2 meanings of the word "gaining weight"



  First of all, please read "The highest priority is the mechanism to maintain present condition" before reading this one.

  I would like to define first. There are 2 meanings of the expression "gaining weight" which we use daily. I think the confusion of these 2 meanings cause a lot of misunderstandings.
  For example, such as “you'll gain weight if you eat a lot of calories” or “even with diets when you rebound, you might weigh even more than you did before you did the diet” etc.


  I realized this when I got really thin, but I think the confusion of these 2 meanings result in various misunderstandings and false information and most people are dieting in the wrong way.

1.When your weight goes back to your Base Weight  (A)

  First one is “gaining weight” meaning to go back to your Base Weight based on the mechanism to "maintain present condition". Many of those who are obese try to reduce calorie intake or do exercise to reduce weight. In such cases, the body will always try to go back to your Base Weight so as soon as you eat, naturally, you get fat.

  When people say “I will get fat if I eat cake ” or “I gain weight when I eat a lot”, they are mostly talking about this meaning. I often meet women who say “My body tends to get fat when I eat” but it really means that the body is repeating a “mini-diet” and a “mini-rebound” by the mechanism to "maintain present condition".


▷Toru Watanabe, Japanese actor, used to be heavy but with a diet, he weighed around 70kg when he appeared on a TV show. However, when he got married at 26, he couldn't maintain his diet anymore and ate a lot and he went back to 130kg. (It is said that he made a new record for his weight change every time he dieted)


  Again with the help of his wife’s home cooking, he succeeded in losing 40kg. However, after all he repeated his rebound. It’s quite famous in Japan.

  Here, “gaining weight” means the mechanism of going back to your Base Weight, so you will put on weight as soon as you take sugar, meat and fat etc. (You can imagine a beaker in which water is increasing and decreasing)


2.When your Base Weight itself increases (B)

  On the other hand,the second “gaining weight” means that your Base Weight itself increases. Though I haven't changed amount of intake (I rather reduced a little), I gained 3 kg in the last year or gained 10kg in the last 3 years... meaning your maximum weight has been increasing. This is not due to intake amount or calorie but by the mechanism of starvation (strictly speaking, I defined it as “intestinal starvation” ).


  For example, someone who has never been more than 60kg has become 63kg in the last year. In this case, it means that his/her Base Weight itself increased from 60kg to 63kg.
  When you gain weight to your Base Weight from a rebound after a diet, it's the (A) mechanism , but if you gain weight naturally more than your Base Weight, it is the (B) mechanism. This is because the diet creates a  starving situation.
  Generally, it is said that “eating while your metabolism is low makes you fat” but I will write an argument to this soon.

  Note: Through my own experience and people around me who gained weight suddenly, I became certain that my theory is right so I wrote this article. If I can correspond with a research institute, I have the means to prove it.


 An extreme argument, Sumo wrestler(Japan's national sport) gain weight with mix of (A) and (B) and though it looks like they gain weight by eating, the mechanism is the same as those who gained even more weight after doing a diet.




The highest priority is the mechanism to "maintain present condition"



1.Each person has the mechanism to "maintain present condition"

  First of all, I want to explain the most important point. It's the assumption that each person has the mechanism to "maintain present condition". I recognize that this is the pre-condition of everyone.


 For example, there are 3 women;

(A) 48kg・・・who can't gain weight even if she eats

(B) 57kg・・・who can gain weight till 60kg if she eats a lot

(C) 85kg・・・who can gain weight till 90kg if she eats a lot

  All through the year, we get thinner when we are busy and we gain a little fat when we eat a lot...though everyone repeats such things, even if we don't calculate calories strictly, body shape of person won't change so easily. Fat people are fat and thin people are thin.

  So here, I want to define the word “Base Weight” as the weight to which you go back when you continue eating for 3 to 5 days doing nothing such as during the long holidays. Usually in most cases, you won't go beyond the Base Weight and will usually come back to it.


In this example, the Base Weight of A is 48kg and that of B is 60kg and that of C is 90kg. There is the mechanism to "maintain their present condition" working in their body to bring them back to their Base Weight.

  So, it’s difficult to assume a person’s body and weight condition only with calorie intake /consumption. Consider the example above, that if A continues an intake of 100kcal everyday for several months or years, it will be accumulated into fat and she will weigh 80kg is wrong. (She might gain weight but it's a different mechanism)


 In general, people who are obes are living with calorie restrictions so their present weight is lower than their Base Weight. On the other hand, thin people don't have calorie restrictions so their present weight and their Base Weight are often close. Therefore, thin A won't gain weight even if she ate and B and C will gain weight as soon as they eat.

▽Example of Hozumi Hasegawa, the professional boxer who defended 10 times as the 26th Champion of WBC World bantam weight.


  Bantam weight limit is 53.5kg. As his body get older, losing weight became hard and for a defending match, he had to lose more than 10kg in a month. But as soon as the match is over and he started to eat, the weight went back 10kg in a few days. The rate of going back to his Base Weight is so fast. Those who have tried diets and eat less than usual might have experienced this.

2. What fixes the mechanism to "maintain present condition"? 

  If you have studied about the subconscious or brain science, you might know that your current situation (income and status) are fixed by the subconscious. The conscious mind only accounts for 1% of the ability to make a change in a person’s current situation.


  But in here, I believe that a person who goes back to their Base Weight has nothing to do with the conscious or subconscious mind. The one who decides the mechanism to “maintain present condition” is the absorbing ability. 
That is to say, it's the “small intestine” who is also called “the second brain”. This is my conclusion from my own experience but I will talk about this in another blog post.