The Peter Attia Drive - December 17, 2018


#33 - Rudy Leibel, M.D.: Finding the obesity gene and discovering leptin


Episode Stats


Length

2 hours and 20 minutes

Words per minute

157.88351

Word count

22,224

Sentence count

1,170

Harmful content

Misogyny

11

sentences flagged

Hate speech

15

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Dr. Rudy Leibel is a professor at Columbia University, where his work has focused primarily on Type 2 Diabetes and obesity. In this episode, we discuss the discovery of leptin, the genetics of obesity, and the regulation of obesity.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hey everyone, welcome to the Peter Atiyah Drive. I'm your host, Peter Atiyah.
00:00:10.140 The Drive is a result of my hunger for optimizing performance, health, longevity, critical thinking,
00:00:15.600 along with a few other obsessions along the way. I've spent the last several years working with
00:00:19.840 some of the most successful, top-performing individuals in the world, and this podcast
00:00:23.620 is my attempt to synthesize what I've learned along the way to help you live a higher quality,
00:00:28.360 more fulfilling life. If you enjoy this podcast, you can find more information on today's episode
00:00:33.000 and other topics at peteratiyahmd.com.
00:00:41.260 Hey, welcome to this episode of The Drive. On this episode, I interview an amazing scientist and a
00:00:47.480 very dear friend, Dr. Rudy Leibel. Rudy's a professor at Columbia University, where his work has focused
00:00:56.300 primarily on type 2 diabetes and obesity. I've known Rudy for quite a while, probably about six
00:01:03.020 years now, maybe a little longer. We worked together very closely back at the Nutrition Science Initiative,
00:01:09.240 where he was one of the very important collaborators in one of the more theoretical experiments that we
00:01:14.980 did. Rudy and I have always just had a ton of fun just hanging out over great meals and great wine and
00:01:20.880 great beer talking about science. And so I thought it might be fun to try to reproduce some of those
00:01:26.900 discussions here. A couple of things. First, we recorded this on a Friday afternoon on the Upper East
00:01:33.080 Side, and you'll probably notice a little more noise than usual just on account of the street noise. So
00:01:39.560 apologies for that. Second point is, we spend quite a bit of time, probably about the first hour and
00:01:46.000 10 hour and 15 minutes, just talking about the discovery of leptin, for which Rudy played arguably
00:01:54.000 the single most important role. Obviously, many people played a role in the discovery of leptin. But
00:01:58.880 you know, in many ways, Rudy was sort of the chief architect of that. And certainly inside of the
00:02:03.500 scientific community, he is largely regarded as that, though, unfortunately, history may write that
00:02:10.160 story a little bit differently. So for those of you listening to this who don't really,
00:02:14.320 really get off on geeky science and knowing the nuts and bolts of all of the experiments and how
00:02:20.320 one found this gene and the difference between a southern blot and a northern blot and a DNA sequence,
00:02:26.480 you might just want to skip to about an hour 15 when we get to the other stuff. But that said,
00:02:32.340 if you really are interested in science, I think there's a lot to be gained from listening to these
00:02:36.420 discussions because, you know, that's certainly something I plan to do a lot of as interview scientists.
00:02:41.260 And part of that is kind of understanding their stories. Again, a lot of what we talk about in
00:02:45.180 this post is technical. I'm hopeful that in the show notes, we'll be able to provide a lot of sort
00:02:49.940 of the necessary glossary to make it a little easier to ingest. I don't do a great job. I apologize
00:02:55.020 of trying to clarify terms. Occasionally, I remember that not everybody knows what hyperphagia means.
00:03:01.340 And I explained that that means eating too much. But again, I apologize for that. And just look to the
00:03:06.280 show notes if you want clarification on anything. We get into a lot of discussion around obesity,
00:03:11.440 the genetics of obesity and the regulation of obesity. How much of this is regulated centrally,
00:03:16.160 meaning in the brain, versus peripherally, everywhere outside of the brain. We talk a lot
00:03:20.500 about energy expenditure. And for those of you who are really interested in this science,
00:03:24.460 Rudy gives a great explanation of the two techniques that are used to measure energy expenditure,
00:03:28.420 known as indirect calorimetry and doubly labeled water. We talk about a number of genes that are
00:03:33.840 known to predispose to obesity, some very acutely and some very crudely, like the FTO gene. And we,
00:03:40.540 of course, talk a lot about insulin resistance, which in many ways is sort of a bit of a paradox,
00:03:45.040 because on the one hand, if you're insulin resistant, you technically shouldn't be able
00:03:48.460 to get fat. But of course, many insulin resistant people are able to get fat. They do accumulate
00:03:53.440 adipose tissue. What else can I say about this? I guess those are kind of the most important things
00:03:57.820 I'd say to guide you. So in summary, if you really don't want to hear about how leptin was
00:04:01.800 discovered, skip to an hour 15. If you do sit back and relax. The other highlight of this was,
00:04:07.900 it was the first time I ever gave Rudy a Topo Chico. He loved it. And I think I've got another
00:04:13.320 convert. So anyway, hope you enjoy this. And without further ado, here is my lovely discussion
00:04:20.140 with the amazing Dr. Rudy Lively.
00:04:25.620 All right, Rudy, how are you?
00:04:27.500 I'm very well, thank you.
00:04:28.680 Thanks so much for trekking over to the east side.
00:04:31.820 Well, thanks for inviting me.
00:04:35.460 This will be one of the first times in a while that we hang out without a drink,
00:04:39.880 including my favorite beer, which you're one of the few people I've shared it with.
00:04:44.720 Exactly.
00:04:46.140 I don't tell anybody what that beer is because I, and I just found 19 bottles of it in Florida
00:04:52.360 last week. So I'm pretty psyched about that. I'll continue to share with you, of course.
00:04:58.000 It's still in Florida.
00:04:59.380 No, it's actually in San Diego right now. Yeah, it just arrived. There's so much I want to talk
00:05:04.100 about. I almost don't even know where to begin. I'm guessing that a number of the people listening
00:05:08.140 to this won't actually know who you are necessarily, but I think by the end of this,
00:05:12.320 they'll be super interested in learning more about you. During the introduction, I will have
00:05:17.900 explained sort of a lot of stuff about you, but tell me a little bit about what you do and,
00:05:22.660 more importantly, why you do it.
00:05:24.580 I've been very interested since the past 30 years or so in biology of the regulation of body weight
00:05:34.180 in both animals and humans. But the studies of animals are designed primarily to shed light on
00:05:43.760 what's the basis for the control of body weight in humans. I'm a physician and have been interested
00:05:49.840 in the clinical problem of obesity for even longer than I've been doing research on it.
00:05:57.420 And I have taken, over the years, various approaches, beginning with studies of human
00:06:05.700 adipose tissue aspirated using various needles from various subcutaneous depots in humans, meaning
00:06:13.960 around the rear end and in the front of the abdomen. And then became very interested in the
00:06:21.780 genetics of obesity and have done some studies trying to identify various genes that are related
00:06:28.680 to that and continue to do so. And have also done a large number of studies in mice designed to
00:06:35.560 look at this problem. And very recently, or at least within the past five or 10 years, have begun to focus
00:06:44.360 on the use of stem cells to try to understand, again, the biology of brain cells that regulate body weight
00:06:52.160 and the cells in the pancreas that produce insulin. Because obesity and diabetes go hand-in-hand
00:07:00.480 clinically. And this is not an accident. They're very tightly related in a number of really very
00:07:07.560 interesting ways. So that my studies of obesity have led more or less inexorably towards the study
00:07:16.560 of diabetes as well. So now my laboratory really does some of both. And you're at Columbia now. You
00:07:23.760 were at Rockefeller before that. But originally, you were in Boston, correct? That's correct. My clinical
00:07:29.300 training. I'm trained as a pediatrician and an endocrinologist. And that training took place
00:07:34.420 in Boston at both the Massachusetts General Hospital and the Children's Hospital. And then for
00:07:41.260 five or six years, I worked at both the Mass General and a community hospital in the Boston area,
00:07:48.600 the Cambridge City Hospital. Again, doing both general pediatrics and some endocrinology.
00:07:56.040 So what got you interested in obesity?
00:07:57.600 I was interested in obesity, or at least in the part of the brain that regulates body weight,
00:08:04.160 even as a medical student. We didn't study it specifically. It wasn't emphasized the role of
00:08:10.300 the hypothalamus, which turns out to be very important in that regard. But I had the opportunity
00:08:15.280 as a medical student, actually a first-year medical student, to work at the Walter Reed Army
00:08:21.880 Institute of Research with a neuroscientist named Harvey Carton, who was a physician who was interested
00:08:30.380 actually in the study of bird brains. And he took me on for a summer, actually it ended up being two
00:08:40.480 summers, to work in his laboratory, primarily helping with histological studies of the bird brain.
00:08:47.540 But the laboratory that he was in was run by a man named Wally J. H. Nauda, who was recognized at the
00:08:57.220 time, and subsequently perhaps even more so, as one of the great neuroanatomists with regard to the
00:09:03.880 hypothalamus. So actually I was indoctrinated a bit just by hanging around the other people who were
00:09:10.780 working there, including Dr. Carton, in terms of the importance of the hypothalamus in a number of
00:09:16.260 areas of physiology.
00:09:18.780 Where does the hypothalamus sit in relation to the pituitary, or even more grossly, like other main
00:09:24.380 structures in the brain?
00:09:25.260 Yeah, I think you can sort of picture it as lying between, or being triangulated in a sense, or at the
00:09:32.280 crosshairs of a line drawn between the eyes and the side of the forehead, and it's situated just
00:09:39.900 above the pituitary gland, if you know where that is.
00:09:43.500 Yeah, which is sort of behind the optic chiasm.
00:09:46.140 Yes, that's correct. And it's a very small organ, or at least it's a very small part of the brain,
00:09:53.640 about the tip of the small finger, but does play a role in the regulation of many important
00:10:00.640 physiological functions, including things like blood pressure, body temperature, and from my point of
00:10:09.200 view, very importantly, body weight, and also increasingly apparent that it plays an important
00:10:14.860 role in blood sugar control as well. So it's been known for many, many years as being a critical
00:10:21.700 part of the brain, a so-called vegetative brain, not under conscious control.
00:10:27.720 Work that's gone on over the past 30, 40, 50 years has increasingly raised the level of sophistication
00:10:37.260 with which we understand the function of that part of the brain.
00:10:42.240 About 21 years ago, or maybe 20 years ago, whenever it was, but early in medical school,
00:10:47.060 I remember when we did neuroanatomy, the professor said, if you have to sacrifice any part of your brain,
00:10:53.500 and you're sort of prioritizing, the last thing you want to sacrifice is the hypothalamus. If you're only
00:11:00.160 allowed to keep a couple square centimeters of brain, keep the hypothalamus.
00:11:05.220 You know, I mean, we could get into the weeds on exactly...
00:11:09.060 That's a poor man's problem when you're...
00:11:11.160 That's right. I think that would be important. The other thing you'd want to hang on to is the part of
00:11:15.900 the brain that regulates respiration. Because even with the hypothalamus, if you're not breathing,
00:11:22.060 you're not going to get very far. But I agree.
00:11:24.840 I think he was excluding the brain stem for this.
00:11:27.100 I understand. I understand. I would... The hypothalamus is right up there.
00:11:30.280 Yeah. Yeah. At some point, I want to come back to it. I want to have you tell us all about Zucker
00:11:35.020 rats, because that's sort of what got me interested in this idea of how can this part of the brain,
00:11:40.980 when subjected to so many different types of insults and lesions, produce so many,
00:11:46.380 I mean, seemingly wild and disparate phenotypes that seem so out of whack. But before we go there,
00:11:52.800 let's go back to... You're a junior pediatrician schlepping along, taking care of overweight kids,
00:11:59.040 and we're in the, what, the late 70s? What time of year is this? What time of your life is this?
00:12:04.400 Yeah, we're in the mid-70s.
00:12:05.880 Mid-70s. So there's not that many obese kids, are there?
00:12:09.840 There are plenty.
00:12:10.980 Still in back then, yeah?
00:12:12.240 Oh, yeah.
00:12:12.700 Okay. So what are you doing for them? How are you helping them?
00:12:15.840 So back in that day, the conventional view was that obesity was largely due to imbalances of
00:12:24.100 hormones, at least potentially, in addition to whatever other sort of behavioral issues might
00:12:29.360 be implicated. But almost all children with obesity were referred, if it was significant and severe
00:12:38.780 enough to either an endocrinologist or a psychiatrist. That was sort of the bifurcation point for referral
00:12:45.920 of these children. I don't think either the endocrinologist or the psychiatrist really could
00:12:51.320 do very much for these children. I certainly couldn't. And it was an evening in the fall in the city of
00:12:59.160 Cambridge in a small office that I used for the very small number of referrals that I actually saw.
00:13:06.220 Most of my time was spent with the medical students trying to teach them various aspects of pediatrics.
00:13:12.320 But one evening, I saw a young boy about seven or eight years old with his mother and examined him,
00:13:19.960 weighed him, and so forth, and determined. It's quite clear that he was very obese. He had no
00:13:24.760 other stigmata of the sorts of things that we looked for, meaning very severe problems with thyroid
00:13:31.880 or adrenal gland, which can sometimes produce severe obesity. And he didn't have any of the stigmata of the
00:13:38.080 single genetic type of disorders that were known about at the time, like Prader-Willi syndrome or
00:13:44.020 Part A. Beatle. And I said to the mother, your son has severe obesity. I can't tell you what the
00:13:52.560 etiology of it is. It's clear that there's something going on. There's problems that we don't really
00:13:59.340 fully understand or understand very well at all. And my only advice is to try to restrict the number of 0.98
00:14:07.140 calories that he eats and increase his physical activity, which is, I think, unobjectionable
00:14:13.660 advice in any circumstance like that. And the mother turned to the boy and said,
00:14:22.200 Randall, let's get out of here. This doctor doesn't know shit.
00:14:29.080 I love that you remember his name.
00:14:31.080 Oh, yes, I do remember his name. And she took him by the hand and they left. And I remember
00:14:36.880 sitting behind the desk and thinking to myself, Randall's mother, you've got a point.
00:14:44.240 And it was that experience, actually, I'd been interested in some of the physiological aspects
00:14:49.980 of obesity and adipose tissue that led me to decide that if I was going to do anything about
00:14:58.720 this, I was going to have to train myself to do the kind of research that might be helpful in terms
00:15:04.720 of understanding the disease. And it was shortly after that, that I actually moved to New York,
00:15:10.660 to the Rockefeller, to begin to try to do those kinds of experiments.
00:15:14.580 Yeah, that story, which obviously we've discussed before, and I get such a kick out of it. But at
00:15:20.660 the same time, it's actually a remarkable example of something that medicine is a privilege. It gives
00:15:25.840 you a privilege and it's up to you to do anything with it, right? Which is patients generally provide
00:15:31.020 the appropriate physician with the right level of humility. And I think, look, it's a testament to you
00:15:37.000 that you sort of could reflect on what Randall's mom said, because I think there are other people
00:15:41.560 who couldn't, right? There are other people who could say, well, screw you. That's the advice I've
00:15:45.160 got. And that's like the best I can do. And, you know, wouldn't skip a beat kind of moving on. But
00:15:50.320 when I talk to a lot of great physician scientists, that seems to be the one thing that they all have
00:15:54.980 in common. They may have many things in common, but this one is important, which is it's the ability
00:15:59.540 to sort of pause in your tracks and say, wait a minute, there is a clinical situation and I cannot
00:16:04.940 for the life of me explain it. And I have to know the answer. So it's so amazing that one
00:16:11.160 chance encounter like that basically altered the entire course of your career and put you on this
00:16:17.140 path to do some really amazing stuff as we'll, I think, discuss in the next hour or so.
00:16:23.580 I think you're probably right that one of the great, I think, privileges of a medical education
00:16:30.500 is that it does give you a very broad perspective on the human condition, if you want to call it that,
00:16:36.340 all the way from psychological issues to very fundamental biological ones. And physicians
00:16:43.460 as a group do have this, as you pointed out, rather unique opportunity to look at a problem
00:16:51.700 that afflicts human beings, sometimes at the level of basic metabolism and endocrinology,
00:16:59.320 other times on a more systemic or even social level. And I'm sure we could name some of the
00:17:06.720 names of people who have operated all these levels. But I think you're right. I've always felt that it
00:17:13.580 was really somehow an enormous opportunity and a gift to be able to pursue this down to the level
00:17:22.340 that I've been able to do in the past 30 years or so. And I must say, in addition to whatever my
00:17:29.780 previous training and experience did to make that possible, I also have to acknowledge that my family
00:17:38.020 was very supportive in terms of allowing me to basically back out of a more classical sort of
00:17:46.140 academic medical track and retrain myself to the level that I thought was required in order to do
00:17:53.840 this research or basically move from a very nice home in Brookline, Massachusetts to an 800 square foot
00:18:01.340 apartment in Manhattan with a wife and two small children and lived there for 15 or 16 years while I
00:18:11.340 sort of got my act together. There's plenty of great research that can happen at Harvard. Why did you
00:18:16.620 come to New York? I came to New York actually after looking around in the Boston area for someone who
00:18:22.940 could mentor me in this kind of activity. And it turned out there were, I mean, there's some interesting
00:18:28.780 stories about that. But the advice that I got from the people who were not in a position to help me in the
00:18:34.840 way that I thought I needed help was that I might consider going to the Rockefeller and working with a
00:18:40.420 physician scientist named Jules Hirsch, who at the time was very interested in the biology of adipose
00:18:47.160 tissue from a number of perspectives. And I had actually communicated with Dr. Hirsch in the literature
00:18:55.080 by commenting on some of the work that he had done with regard to adipocytes and signals that might come
00:19:02.840 from adipocytes that affect potentially food intake and body weight. This was an area that he was quite
00:19:08.840 interested in. And I was too, based on some of the thinking I had done about it while I was in the
00:19:15.080 training in Boston. And he and I actually had had a communication in the literature on some of the
00:19:21.360 work that he had done. And I went actually to visit his laboratory while I was in New York for an entirely
00:19:27.520 different reason. And it was very shortly after that that I moved. Which is another great example of
00:19:33.460 the types of common threads we see in great scientists, whether they be scientists or physician
00:19:38.880 scientists, which is mentorship, right? Again, every person I talk to who's done something remarkable in
00:19:44.140 science can point to mentors, a mentor or mentors. And obviously for you, Jules was probably the most
00:19:51.900 important mentor, I'm guessing. That's right. I had very important other mentors in the area of
00:19:58.060 clinical medicine. And the one who trained me in endocrinology, an individual, again, a physician
00:20:04.720 scientist, more clinically oriented named Jack Crawford, himself was very interested in the role
00:20:11.520 of body fat and its interaction with other physiological systems in the body, most notably the
00:20:19.400 onset of puberty. And it was he that actually put me in contact with another scientist at Harvard named
00:20:26.140 Rose Frisch, who also was very interested in why, for example, young women who lost weight as a result of 0.87
00:20:34.300 anorexia, or more commonly in her experience, due to very vigorous physical training for things like
00:20:42.040 distance running or bicycling, swimming, became amenorrheic. In other words, their period stopped. And Rose was
00:20:49.520 very curious about why this was and whether there was a communication between fat and parts of the
00:20:56.120 brain that regulate the gonadal axis, which is the hypothalamus again. And I remember having many
00:21:03.640 conversations with Rose about where the signal might be coming from. She thought it actually might be
00:21:09.360 coming from adipose tissue or adipocytes in the bone marrow. And it was always encouraging me to
00:21:14.940 study bone marrow as a source of whatever this signal might be.
00:21:20.480 So what year did you arrive at Rockefeller?
00:21:22.900 1978.
00:21:23.460 At that point in time, was the adipose tissue, was adipose cell, was this regarded as an inert
00:21:33.240 sort of storage depot for fatty acid, or was it considered an endocrine organ? Like what was the
00:21:39.480 state of thinking about fat?
00:21:42.420 At that time, the view of the role of adipose tissue was very strongly in the direction of the
00:21:51.960 sort of former characterization that you made, which is that it was a passive depot for fat
00:21:58.200 in the form of storing free fatty acids as triglycerides so that they were hydrophobic,
00:22:05.980 so that you could pack a lot of calories into an organ or into a cell without having a lot of water
00:22:11.940 there. So it's a very efficient way of storing energy. Actually, as you know, up to probably around
00:22:18.740 nine calories per gram. And its role as a signaling device or an endocrine organ was really people
00:22:29.340 were thinking about it, but there was no firm evidence in this regard, other than I think the
00:22:36.740 increasing sense that the size of the adipose mass was doing something to the levels of circulating
00:22:44.620 insulin, that somehow insulin rises when the fat mass rises and the mechanism or the relationship
00:22:52.280 of these two...
00:22:52.560 Not the other way around? Was it clear which direction?
00:22:55.700 So at the time, I think the view was pretty much that as fat mass increases, the concentration of
00:23:02.000 insulin rises to meet the consequences of so-called insulin resistance, which occurred not only in
00:23:10.280 adipose tissue, but maybe more importantly in liver and muscle, and so that there was some relationship
00:23:18.500 between fat mass and this endocrine. But fat mass is a secretory organ itself of molecules that might
00:23:27.620 have some of these effects. It was really a pretty new idea that nobody really had any direct,
00:23:34.980 at least at the time, evidence for.
00:23:37.140 Obviously, we're going to get to the story of leptin, which I think is just another great example
00:23:41.780 of incredible persistence, an incredible focus and drive. But obviously, before getting to the
00:23:49.200 punchline, which occurred several decades later, what was your first insight into a hormone that
00:23:57.140 would go on to be leptin? Where did you first figure this, that there was something that was being
00:24:01.600 secreted by fat cells? I think the first evidence in this regard, or at least some of the most important
00:24:09.700 evidence, came from experiments that were done by an investigator at the Jackson Laboratories in Maine
00:24:17.460 named Douglas Coleman. And Coleman was a biochemist, physiologist, who was interested in some of the rare
00:24:29.960 mouse mutations that led to very severe obesity. And he was one of the first to study
00:24:38.760 the OB-OB or obese mouse, which was a spontaneous mutation that arose in the Jackson colony.
00:24:48.360 And he also was one of the close students of another mutation that arose there a number of
00:24:54.840 years later in the so-called diabetes or DB gene.
00:24:59.260 So what was the phenotype of this OB-OB mouse?
00:25:02.560 The OB-OB mouse was... 0.70
00:25:05.640 That's not to be confused with the OB-1 Kenobi mouse. That's a very different phenotype, right?
00:25:09.660 That's correct.
00:25:10.120 Yeah.
00:25:10.440 The OB-OB mouse was noted to be very severely obese very early in life. So these animals were
00:25:21.900 clearly obese by the time shortly after weaning, which is three or four weeks of age. You could
00:25:30.560 tell that they were obese. And if you left them alone and let them eat as much as they wanted,
00:25:35.600 they would eat up to the point of becoming pretty heroically obese, meaning these animals could reach
00:25:43.320 weights of 70 or 80 grams. Whereas a normal so-called wild type mouse at maximum weight would
00:25:51.780 be somewhere around 40 or 50 grams much later in life. An OB mouse could get up to 60 or 70 grams
00:25:59.920 very early in life. The animals were infertile.
00:26:03.400 So how did you, how did they keep breeding them?
00:26:05.380 So the way they would breed these animals is breed the parents, the heterozygous animals that were able
00:26:12.820 to generate.
00:26:13.920 So get two heteros to make homos. 1.00
00:26:15.720 Correct.
00:26:16.480 So the phenotype centered around hyperphagia?
00:26:18.940 It's centered around two phenotypes actually that Dr. Coleman was able to show. Primarily the
00:26:25.600 obesity was due to hyperphagia, but he also was able to demonstrate by a mechanism.
00:26:30.600 Sorry, I should just clarify for listeners. That means excessive appetite.
00:26:34.380 Yes, by excess food intake. That was the primary cause of their obesity. But he also,
00:26:41.140 by using a technique called pair feeding, where he would only feed the animal the amount that a
00:26:46.000 normal weight animal would eat, that those animals tended to store more of their excess calories as 0.99
00:26:52.260 fat. We sometimes refer to this as partitioning. And by another set of experimental maneuvers was
00:26:58.860 able to show that their metabolic rate was slower. So these animals had what you might call a trifecta
00:27:05.860 for obesity. They ate more, spent less, and whatever they stored was preferentially stored as fat.
00:27:14.180 And these were fascinating animals. I mean, people tried for many years to figure out what was wrong
00:27:20.140 with them. And they had many metabolic consequences of their obesity, but nothing about their physiology
00:27:27.020 necessarily pointed to what the primary mechanism was, where the genetics clearly indicated that this
00:27:35.840 was a single gene, or very likely to be a single.
00:27:39.300 And this, of course, is long before you've got your PCR technology that can very easily help you
00:27:45.380 sequence this. So two questions, though. Lifespan was what?
00:27:49.560 Lifespan, not severely affected, actually. They could live to a fairly normal lifespan,
00:27:55.300 somewhat short. Two and a half, three years?
00:27:58.060 Not quite. They don't last quite that long, but certainly up to 18 months or two years.
00:28:03.620 Important to note, because of the question of whether fat makes something or not, Coleman
00:28:08.440 not only observed these OB mice, but also this second mutation that arose later at the Jackson Lab and was
00:28:17.180 named the diabetes mouse. That's because that animal looked a lot like an OB mouse, but got diabetes
00:28:24.240 very early in life, unlike the OB mouse, which seemed to be obese, but not necessarily particularly
00:28:32.880 diabetes prone. And it was clear that the mutation in the gene, again, another single gene that caused
00:28:39.800 the diabetes mouse, was not the OB gene. It was on a different chromosome. Coleman was able to show
00:28:46.680 that. So here you had animals that looked a great deal like each other, at least in terms of the
00:28:53.600 overeating and the low energy expenditure. One was prone to get diabetes and the other not. And what
00:29:00.180 Coleman ultimately did was to join the circulation of the OB mouse to a wild-type animal and the DB or
00:29:11.280 diabetes mouse to a wild-type animal. So like a live parabiosis. It's a lot. That's the technical
00:29:17.220 term for it is a parabiosis. And he showed that if you hooked an OB mouse up to a wild-type mouse in
00:29:24.080 this way, that the OB mouse would correct its hyperphagia, its excess food intake, and actually
00:29:32.240 begin to lose weight. So something presumably in the wild-type mouse, some humoral factor, some hormone,
00:29:38.920 some something, must have been missing in the OB-OB mouse that, when given to it, corrected its
00:29:45.660 phenotype. Correct. And then what happened when you did the parabiosis with the DB mouse? With the DB
00:29:51.000 mouse, you got the opposite situation, where the wild-type animal began to lose weight and actually
00:29:59.600 stopped eating and would die of starvation, basically. Whereas the DB mouse just went merrily on its way,
00:30:06.480 eating and remaining obese. So Coleman thought, based on these two experiments, that maybe the OB mouse
00:30:17.300 was missing something that the wild-type mouse produced, and the DB mouse, that looked an awful
00:30:22.780 lot like an OB mouse, was missing the ability to respond to whatever that molecule or molecules
00:30:30.320 were that were required to regulate body weight. And this was around the time that it was becoming
00:30:36.900 clear that hormones had receptors that were specific to those hormones, like thyroid, insulin,
00:30:43.220 growth hormone. So Coleman hypothesized that the OB mouse was missing what we refer to as the ligand,
00:30:50.780 the circulating hormone, and the DB mouse was missing the receptor for it. And it turns out
00:30:57.680 that Dr. Coleman was right. Everything you've just said was known by what point in time?
00:31:03.640 I would say by the late 1970s. Okay, so just as you're coming on the scene, the whippersnapper who 0.93
00:31:10.020 doesn't know shit. Yes. The guy up in Jackson, up in Maine, knows this, and you can't wait to get all over
00:31:17.680 this. Correct. So I began by actually studying adipose tissue to see whether there was something
00:31:26.240 that might be regulated by adipose tissue that would fit in this sort of general category of
00:31:33.960 something that might produce a signal or might be related to the anatomy of the adipose tissue.
00:31:41.880 At the time, Jules Hirsch was particularly interested in the fact that it appeared that what happens when
00:31:48.720 people get obese is that their fat cells expand up to a sort of maximum size, and then new fat cells
00:31:55.900 begin to appear. Whether they were made de novo or had been resting in the area of the other adipocytes
00:32:02.180 wasn't clear at the time. But what happens as people get more and more obese is that more and more fat
00:32:08.060 cells are recruited so that if you look at a very obese individual, they have what is referred to in
00:32:15.300 the literature as hyperplastic adipose tissue. They have more fat cells. And Jules had actually figured
00:32:20.620 out a way to count the fat cells of a human being. And you can look under a microscope and see how big
00:32:27.140 the fat cells are. So he was very interested in what it is that permits a big fat cell to call up,
00:32:35.060 if you will, the other fat cells that are going to be needed once it reaches a critical size,
00:32:40.660 and whether these fat cells were generating something that might act like a signal.
00:32:46.180 Are there any organelles inside a fat cell? Oh, yeah. Fat cell has the complete repertoire
00:32:50.820 of organelles that any other cell does. So it's got a quote-unquote regular nucleus. It's got
00:32:57.260 mitochondria. Oh, yeah. Yeah. It's got the whole... It's just its cytoplasm is dominated by these lipid
00:33:03.460 droplets. Correct. It's designed to be able to hold these huge lipid droplets, but otherwise is a
00:33:08.640 perfectly respectable cell. It has all the other components. And what Jules had been doing, along
00:33:17.200 with another investigator in the lab, a guy named Irv Faust, was extirpating adipose tissue from rats.
00:33:24.640 They were working primarily with rats, although there were some OB mice around. I'd actually seen
00:33:30.500 those when I was at Harvard in Boston. An endocrinologist who trained me used to talk to me
00:33:35.880 about them. But Jules and Irv were extirpating adipose tissue depots from rats and looking to
00:33:44.640 see what happened. And one of the things that they were struck by is that when they took a fat pad out,
00:33:50.560 if they waited long enough and just let the animal eat whatever it wanted to eat, it would eat its way
00:33:56.780 back up to restoring that fat pad. Through de novo creation of more fat cells? 0.89
00:34:02.280 So you leave the capsule of the depot there and it is able to regenerate new fat cells and they fill
00:34:11.100 up and they don't fill up to three times the size that they were before. They go right back to the
00:34:16.360 appropriate size for that depot. And one of the things that Jules and Irv were very interested in
00:34:24.360 is how does the animal know that it should eat a little bit more to be able to generate the fat
00:34:32.040 that's been extirpated? And did this experiment only work when you started with obese rats or did
00:34:38.580 it work if you took a lean rat as well? It worked with lean rats just as well. As a matter of fact,
00:34:44.040 most of the work they did was with lean rats or not genetically obese rats.
00:34:49.120 Now speaking of rats, you explained to us what the OB-OB and the DB-DB-DB-OB.
00:34:56.860 What about the Zucker rat, which preceded a lot of this stuff but had some interesting and similar
00:35:01.040 features, right? Right. So the Zucker rat was discovered or identified, if you will, by a woman 0.80
00:35:08.520 named Lois Zucker, the rats named after her and her husband. And it had characteristics very similar to
00:35:15.280 these mice that we were talking about, the OB and the DB mice. They were hyperphagic. They
00:35:21.520 appeared to have a little bit lower energy expenditure and would become hugely obese. I
00:35:28.260 mean, these animals got up to heroic size. Yeah, we're going to include some pictures of the
00:35:33.520 Zucker mice in this, in the notes. The Zucker rats. 0.96
00:35:36.340 That's right, the Zucker rats in this show. 0.55
00:35:37.760 Got very, again, got very obese. And many, many studies were done of the Zucker rat trying to,
00:35:45.320 again, understand what the mechanism behind its obesity was. Again, it appeared to be due to a
00:35:53.400 single gene. In other words, like the OB or DB mouse, there was a single mutant gene. When the animal
00:35:59.320 had two copies of the abnormal or low activity gene, the animals would become very obese.
00:36:05.940 And one of the reigning hypotheses about the Zucker rat, again, at around the late 70s, early 80s,
00:36:15.540 was that the fat itself was making too much of an enzyme called lipoprotein lipase. And this is an
00:36:24.680 enzyme which is produced by adipose tissue, by adipocytes, which breaks down circulating triglycerides
00:36:32.500 and allows the free fatty acids that are released to be taken up by the adipocytes. And the glycerol
00:36:40.280 backbone, so to speak, remains in the circulation. So the idea was that the Zucker rat, for some reason,
00:36:46.980 had hyperactive lipoprotein lipase. And the adipose tissue was acting like a vacuum cleaner,
00:36:53.820 in a sense. It was sucking up the circulating fat, the triglyceride, and storing it. And that's how
00:37:01.900 the animals got obese. And in association with that observation was the idea that maybe the process of
00:37:09.100 sucking up substrate from the circulation does something to drive or increase food intake. So
00:37:18.120 this model was often referred to as a pull model for the development of obesity. That is that the
00:37:26.260 adipose tissue was actually acting as a pulling mechanism for substrate, which was in turn affecting
00:37:33.280 food intake. So the animal got fat that way. So the animal was effectively starving. Even though it
00:37:39.340 stored an unbelievable amount of energy, it was disproportionately taking those circulating
00:37:45.280 metabolic fuels and putting them into storage. So that if you buy this idea that something is
00:37:51.520 sensing energy availability, that would naturally drive the hyperphagia, right? Correct. And the other
00:37:58.240 model, the one more consistent, say, with the OB or the DB mouse, was the so-called push model,
00:38:05.340 which is that fat cells were being filled up because the brain itself had a... Was pushing.
00:38:11.140 Pushing the substrate. So these push-pull models were very much discussed in terms of what they said
00:38:19.720 about where the primary mechanisms might be for the control of body weight. Was it the adipose tissue
00:38:27.380 that was basically begging for more fuel and sucking it in and causing the animal to eat that way? Or was
00:38:33.920 there something going on primarily in the brain that was influencing the food intake and the
00:38:40.880 adipose tissue was being packed from the outside? And like all good problems in medicine,
00:38:46.060 there's examples of both that are quite elegant, right? I mean, that's sort of the challenge of
00:38:51.340 this is when you look at this in experimental models, you could find very elegant examples of
00:38:57.080 each, correct? You could find elegant examples that pointed in the direction of both of these.
00:39:03.320 It was interesting. I mean, it was the whole issue of lipoprotein lipase suggested that,
00:39:09.380 again, this model, the Zuckerrat, it was used to support this idea that the LPL was, as it was
00:39:15.980 referred to, was critical in this regard. But it was known that individuals who had total lipoprotein
00:39:23.380 lipase deficiency, and there are such individuals on a genetic basis, had very, very high levels of
00:39:30.460 circulating triglyceride. I mean, these can be life-threatening in terms of the levels that are
00:39:35.620 reached, but they had perfectly normal adipose tissue. So this suggested that maybe LPL wasn't
00:39:41.540 critical or absolutely necessary. Meaning you would expect those patients to have sky-high
00:39:46.680 triglycerides and be emaciated. Yes. And they weren't. And they aren't. So this was already sort
00:39:53.060 of a question about the lipoprotein lipase. And we know that those patients were completely
00:39:58.640 deficient in LPL? Yes. Does that mean they had no LPL on their muscle cells as well?
00:40:03.140 So the individuals who are totally deficient in LPL have no LPL on any cell type.
00:40:11.960 It's hard to imagine how they function. Does that mean they're completely dependent on glycolysis?
00:40:17.000 They are able to take up the fatty acids. They don't need the LPL to break down the triglyceride.
00:40:23.800 They do fine. I mean, in terms of being able to, there's nothing wrong with their manipulation or
00:40:28.840 movement of fatty acid. And that's probably why they have normal adipose tissue and normal muscle.
00:40:35.800 So it's interesting, the history of this, and just to mention this, we now know what the Zucker
00:40:42.560 mutation is. And one of the earliest experiments I did at Rockefeller, or one of the relatively early
00:40:49.480 experiments, is we tried to map the position of the Zucker obesity gene in the same way that we
00:40:58.360 were already trying to map where and ultimately clone the OB and DB gene for pretty obvious reasons
00:41:05.300 at this point, that we wanted to figure out what the signal and whether there was a receptor for this.
00:41:11.800 And as part of this work, a student who worked with me named Gary Truitt made a map of the position
00:41:19.480 of the Zucker gene, which we did by crossing the Zucker rats with another strain of rats so that we
00:41:25.760 could make what's referred to as a genetic map. And tell me how that works, because everything I've
00:41:30.960 ever done with genes came after we had the luxury of real-time PCR. And we just said, you know,
00:41:37.380 my generation had it so easy. You guys, like, when I hear stories about people doing positional gene
00:41:44.200 stuff, you know, 40, 50 years ago, I'm like, wow, that's incredible. So tell me a little technically,
00:41:50.780 like, what were you actually doing to positionally isolate that?
00:41:54.960 So the way these experiments are done, it's pretty much the same principle, is that you take,
00:42:01.480 in the case of rats or mice, which you have this luxury, you can cross one strain of,
00:42:07.380 mouse or rat, to another strain of mouse or rat, and then look for signposts of genetic variation
00:42:16.000 along the entire genome of the animal. And each strain has different sequences of DNA.
00:42:26.040 Major differences are in the so-called non-coding region. Some of the differences are in coding
00:42:31.840 regions. And back then, we used a technique called southern blotting to look for
00:42:37.080 basically putting down signposts on the DNA of an animal to figure out where the differences between
00:42:44.800 the strains resided. And by monitoring the obesity of the animal and knowing which strain was actually
00:42:54.420 carrying the gene that we didn't know what it was, but we know what strain it came from,
00:42:59.440 in this case the Zucker strain. We could actually mark the DNA of these animals that had been 0.66
00:43:06.880 interbred and figure out where the Zucker chromosome, the Zucker genetic markers, were segregating,
00:43:16.940 is the formal term for this, along with the level of obesity of the animal. So we would look for
00:43:22.160 correlation of region which has the Zucker genetic variation with the obesity of the animals. Because
00:43:31.280 if you do these crosses in the way that I described, you get some obese, you're going to get in some
00:43:36.840 non-obese animals. And then by relating where the sequences are corresponding to the strain from
00:43:44.520 which you know the obesity gene must have come, you can actually narrow the region of the genome down
00:43:51.080 to the area that must contain the gene. I mean...
00:43:54.520 And this was a qualitative assessment, not so much a quantitative assessment, right?
00:43:58.680 So the quantitative assessment is, is the animal obese or not obese? You absolutely have to get this
00:44:05.840 right because you're, the obese animal has, in this particular model, two copies of the mutant gene
00:44:12.720 that's producing the obesity. And if it's not obese, it either has one or zero copies. And you need to be
00:44:18.880 absolutely clear what the phenotype is, so to speak, of the animal is. And then if you put these markers
00:44:27.360 down, these signposts down, you can define them, an interval in which that gene must reside. So it's
00:44:37.080 actually, it's, it's in a sense, it's quantitative at the level of the phenotype.
00:44:42.540 So the best you could do is say this is on, you know, 17P or 17Q. That's, that's like the level of
00:44:49.160 resolution you can get out of this?
00:44:50.820 Yes.
00:44:51.560 What happened when they did a parabiosis with a Zucker rat? Did anyone do that? 0.99
00:44:55.180 There have been parabiosis experiments done with rats, but they've generally done these in a,
00:45:03.600 in a slightly different way from the way you asked the question. And those studies have again,
00:45:11.860 supported the idea that the Zucker rat may be overproducing, like the DB mouse, the product,
00:45:19.100 which is suppressive of food intake. And as a matter of fact, when we were trying to clone
00:45:25.120 these genes, I actually took blood out of Zucker rats and injected it into DB mice to see whether
00:45:33.280 or not I could slow down their food intake. Because at one time we were worried that we might not be
00:45:38.400 able to get the gene by mapping and would have to try to isolate the product out of the blood of an
00:45:43.300 animal. But the Zucker rat studies supported the idea that the same as the mice.
00:45:49.560 So we'll fast forward now into the late seventies, early eighties. You're working mostly now in the
00:45:55.800 lab. Your clinical responsibilities have shrunk significantly, right?
00:45:59.660 So at the time I was doing these experiments, I had some experiments still going on, no clinical
00:46:07.240 practice at all. But I was studying humans in the clinical research center at Rockefeller,
00:46:13.220 looking at the effects of weight loss and weight gain on energy metabolism in these individuals.
00:46:23.440 Again, beginning to try to understand what it is that's regulating body weight in a human. The idea
00:46:30.800 being that if you reduce the body weight of a human down by 10 or 20%, what happens to them
00:46:38.020 metabolically that might be consistent with some of these things that had been seen in mice,
00:46:44.260 that would suggest that again, in humans, there's regulatory pathways that are there in order to
00:46:52.340 regulate the amount of stored energy. So my time was basically split between doing these studies of
00:46:59.940 humans who were in the clinical research center for long periods of time, when we would study the
00:47:04.820 metabolic consequences of perturbing their body weight. The other was spent trying to identify
00:47:11.300 these genes or try to clone the genes. So how did that progress through the eighties as you were
00:47:18.180 working to try to identify specifically the OB OB gene? And again, the reason you were pretty confident
00:47:25.140 that it was a single gene was just based on the breeding pattern? Yes. The breeding pattern clearly
00:47:30.580 indicated that this was a single. Because it was sort of Mendelian. Yes, absolutely Mendelian.
00:47:35.940 It's a so-called autosomal recessive Mendelian, as is the DB mouse and the Zucker rat. So what we did 0.51
00:47:43.060 is what I basically described for the rats. Why was it harder for the mice? To clone the gene? Yes.
00:47:49.780 It was not harder. No, no. I think it was equally difficult. What I was describing is when we didn't
00:47:56.420 actually sort of finish that part of the conversation. We did make a map of where the
00:48:02.340 Zucker gene was located in the rat. But we didn't clone the gene out of the rat at that time. And
00:48:10.020 what that experiment showed is that that was interesting apropos this lipoprotein lipase
00:48:15.620 hypothesis is that the Zucker gene was in a part of the rat genome entirely separate from where the LPL
00:48:24.740 LPL gene was located. So from that experiment alone, we knew that it couldn't be LPL as the
00:48:34.660 causal mechanism of the Zucker rat. We didn't know what it was, but we could clearly identify what it
00:48:42.660 wasn't. Because if the gene is not in the location that is segregating with the phenotype, it's not the
00:48:51.060 gene. This was hard for people, I think, to understand or at least to accept at the time.
00:48:57.700 There still, I think, was not full appreciation of what an experiment like that represents,
00:49:05.300 which is basically an unequivocal falsifying experiment. That is, if it isn't in the place
00:49:12.180 where the gene must be, then it can't be the gene. I mean, it's a syllogism.
00:49:17.460 Yeah. And you don't get a lot of those in science.
00:49:20.420 No, you don't get those.
00:49:21.140 Especially in biology.
00:49:22.340 Right. And so this early on, this was one of the proofs that at least we knew one gene
00:49:27.780 that it wasn't.
00:49:28.580 It wasn't.
00:49:29.460 And then to sort of back then to your question, we used a very similar strategy,
00:49:35.140 an identical strategy with the mice. We crossed the mice to strains that were different from the
00:49:41.140 strain on which the mutation existed. And by doing that, we're able to make maps
00:49:45.620 of the region where the gene was located. And I was actually known for other reasons. Coleman
00:49:52.260 had figured it out. He knew which chromosome these genes were on. So we at least had that
00:50:00.260 as a sort of initial guide. But what the gene was or how it worked was obviously entirely unknown.
00:50:08.900 What was Coleman's training?
00:50:10.980 Coleman was trained as a biochemist at the University of Wisconsin, I think. And we actually
00:50:16.100 consulted with Dr. Coleman, Doug, very early on, as a matter of fact, very early on in the process,
00:50:22.020 about which strains of mice might be appropriate as so-called counter strains. That is,
00:50:27.380 mice that would be used to enable these maps to be made. And he was extremely helpful. I mean,
00:50:35.540 we used to come down, we would talk to him, go visit him at Jackson on at least one occasion,
00:50:42.020 met with him in Philadelphia.
00:50:43.460 So he loved the collaboration.
00:50:45.540 He loved it. It was very encouraging. He always said that he wasn't sort of au courant with regard
00:50:53.300 to the tools of so-called molecular genetics. But in fact, I and Jeff Friedman, who was the
00:50:59.380 other sort of PI on this project, neither of us was expert in molecular genetics.
00:51:04.740 So we sort of had to train ourselves to do this, as did the students who worked with us on this project.
00:51:10.180 So when did Jeff enter the lab?
00:51:13.300 I got to know Jeff because he rotated as a resident, actually, at New York Hospital through
00:51:22.020 Jules' lab to work with another investigator there. So I got to know him when he rotated through.
00:51:28.260 But he and I started this project after he entered the Ph.D. program. He was a physician and then went
00:51:36.100 on to get a Ph.D. at Rockefeller in a different laboratory. But he and I started the project to
00:51:42.100 clone these genes together.
00:51:43.860 About what year was that?
00:51:45.700 1985 or six, I guess. And, you know, 86, probably.
00:51:51.380 What were the major steps that took place starting around the mid-'80s that were kind of like the
00:51:57.940 essential? I mean, I think one of the things that's just hard for people, I think, to understand is
00:52:03.060 how much you have to fail in science. I mean, it sounds simple, right? We want to clone a gene.
00:52:09.940 And yet, in that era, that was very hard to do.
00:52:14.820 Right. There were efforts underway at around the same time to clone the gene for Huntington's disease
00:52:22.100 and cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, to name a few.
00:52:27.220 Other single genes.
00:52:28.340 Other single gene disorders. And for a number of reasons, genes that are on
00:52:33.940 sex chromosomes may be a little bit easier to handle in this regard. But the same tools were being used,
00:52:41.700 the so-called southern blotting, putting down markers across the genome, using this rather
00:52:46.580 tedious technique of having to put the DNA down on a blot of some kind and then exposing it with
00:52:54.420 radioactively tagged reagents to be able to find these individual markers. This was a
00:53:00.980 tedious process. One thing that helped with the mice is that there existed a chromosome
00:53:06.740 in mice. So these are called Robertsonian chromosomes in which you have two chromosomes
00:53:12.820 joined to each other. And there was a so-called Robertsonian chromosome that had both chromosome
00:53:18.260 4 and chromosome 6 of the mouse attached to each other. We knew based on Doug Coleman's work that
00:53:25.780 the OB gene was on chromosome 6 and the DB gene was on chromosome 4. And one of the students who came
00:53:32.740 to work on this project very early, a young man named Nate Bahari who came over from New York hospital
00:53:40.500 as a medical student and spent time on this project and then went on to get a PhD working on it, he took
00:53:47.860 glass needles, if you can believe this, and dissected out under a microscope the rough regions of the
00:53:56.100 chromosome 6 and 4 that we knew must have the gene in them and made from those needle dissected 0.59
00:54:05.060 chromosome fragments other markers that we could put down on the DNA from these mice that we had
00:54:13.460 intercrossed to make a finer and finer map of the region in which the gene must reside. And otherwise this was
00:54:21.700 identical to the Zucker strategy in which we very carefully looked at see whether a mouse was obese
00:54:29.300 or not, and again these are mentalizing phenotypes, but we had to be absolutely sure what the phenotype
00:54:36.340 of the mouse was and then we could use the DNA from the obese animal to make a finer and finer map around the
00:54:45.780 region where the gene must reside. I don't even understand how that would work. What resolution of a
00:54:50.180 microscope would you need to be tweaking chromosomes? Chromosomes aren't that small. I mean you can see
00:54:55.540 a chromosome quite easily with a high-powered just a light microscope. Yeah, light microscope. But
00:55:01.300 having the steady hands to be able to and the patience to be able to do this was quite an achievement.
00:55:08.420 I would say it was sine qua non without which this project wouldn't have been done at the time. We didn't
00:55:15.380 have the tools, some of the ones that you already mentioned, available. So we had to try to identify
00:55:21.540 additional signposts, if you will, in the region of the two genes that we were primarily interested in,
00:55:29.380 that is the OB and the DB gene. At the time you're basically thinking,
00:55:32.740 look, we're looking for a gene for a hormone, we're probably looking for a gene for a receptor,
00:55:36.660 so a ligand receptor. Did you have an expectation that those would be on the same chromosome or would
00:55:40.900 that be completely unnecessary? No, we knew that they absolutely weren't. No, no, I knew you knew
00:55:45.380 that they weren't, but would you expect that? No. For example, like in thyroid, is T4 and TSH or T4 and
00:55:54.980 TR, like you know the thyroid receptor, TSH and TSR, are they necessarily? No. No. There's no
00:56:01.220 relationship. No. Yeah. No. So the function doesn't require that the genes be in proximity to each other,
00:56:07.140 and if they are, it's almost always just a coincidence. Got it. So what was the kind of
00:56:13.300 critical breakthrough that led to the cloning of this gene? So what was done basically was to make
00:56:22.660 the map as fine as we could using the reagents that I mentioned to you and some others that we were able
00:56:29.620 to get hold of and using computer programs to put these data together in such a way as to be able to
00:56:37.780 generate as fine a map of the region around this gene as we could. And then what was done was to go
00:56:45.460 into the region that must contain the gene and begin to look for expressed, meaning that the DNA was
00:56:55.300 transcribed transcripts that were being read off of this part of the DNA. And by taking the transcripts
00:57:04.740 that came off and putting them against various organs from the OB or the DB mouse, we would look for
00:57:14.740 transcripts that were specifically altered in the animals that were mutant for the gene. So you would
00:57:23.220 expect, you might ordinarily expect maybe the level of the gene that we were looking for would be very low
00:57:29.300 in the organ that was affected. And again, even though we know now it was adipose tissue and there
00:57:35.380 were certainly reasons to think that might be where the OB gene was, when we did these experiments we
00:57:40.900 actually looked at every organ in the animal, brain, thyroid, muscle, adipose tissue, anything we could
00:57:48.580 get our hands on. We actually dissected out almost everything out of a mouse to look to see where the
00:57:56.180 deficiency or the excess might be. Sometimes gene transcripts are overexpressed, although they're not
00:58:02.500 functionally competent. And actually at a visit to the Jackson labs when Doug Coleman was retiring,
00:58:11.460 one of the investigators there asked me if I would like to have, or we would like to have
00:58:18.740 mice that appeared to have the OB mutation, but a different mouse. So the original mutation occurred
00:58:26.340 in the mouse that was identified at Jackson in the early 1950s. This was a new mutation that had arisen
00:58:33.380 and almost certainly wouldn't be identical to the one that had arisen earlier.
00:58:37.540 But it was similar in phenotypes? Absolutely identical in phenotypes. So I got those mice
00:58:43.220 and we took them to Rockefeller. What did you call them?
00:58:47.380 2Js. So the OB, the first mutation we referred to as 1J, that's just the nomenclature. And the
00:58:54.420 second one was OB 2J. And we took the OB organs out of the 1Js and the 2Js and ran these transcripts
00:59:03.700 against them using the technique called Northern blotting at the time.
00:59:07.620 Not to be confused with Western blotting.
00:59:09.540 Not to be confused with Western blotting. So Northern blotting is looking actually at RNA.
00:59:14.340 It turned out that the 2J was extremely valuable animal because those animals didn't express any
00:59:23.380 of what turned out to be the leptin transcript. Whereas the 1Js actually overexpressed it,
00:59:31.700 but it was functionally inadequate, functionally inactive. But the transcript was increased,
00:59:38.260 again, for reasons having to do with the molecular biology of how these systems work. But when we saw
00:59:43.780 that there was one animal that had a very low level and the other very high, this was a smoking gun,
00:59:50.740 so to speak. This was the evidence that that piece of the genome was actually a part of the OB gene.
00:59:58.340 So ultimately, where did this ligand, where did it show up?
01:00:03.380 The OB gene showed up almost solely, virtually solely, I mean, in adipose tissue. Fully consistent
01:00:11.140 with the idea that adipose tissue was producing something that was picked up in Doug's parabiosis experiments.
01:00:19.060 Which chromosome?
01:00:20.660 Chromosome 6 of the mouse, it's chromosome 7 of the human. We actually knew that because we could put the
01:00:30.100 orthologs of the mouse genes down on human DNA. And so just like we did with the Zucker rat,
01:00:37.460 we actually knew where the gene was.
01:00:41.380 Do mice have 23 pairs of chromosomes?
01:00:43.540 They have, yes, 23.
01:00:45.860 23, including the sex.
01:00:47.060 Yeah.
01:00:47.860 So what name was given to this?
01:00:50.580 I mean, it's referred to as the OB gene or the name that was given to the protein is leptin,
01:00:57.060 which was, the name was chosen because that suggested that whatever this was,
01:01:02.980 it had an effect to lighten the body weight of an animal.
01:01:06.580 So now you have it that the fat cell secretes leptin and the OB mouse can't make leptin, correct?
01:01:16.420 Correct.
01:01:17.460 And the DB mouse makes all the leptin in the world.
01:01:20.260 This wasn't known at the time because the gene, the first gene to be cloned was the OB gene.
01:01:27.140 And the fact that the DB gene was the receptor was actually learned in two ways.
01:01:34.260 One by taking the OB protein and putting it down on what's called an expression library
01:01:42.260 from part of the brain, the choroid plexus.
01:01:44.580 Wait, sorry, to interrupt one thing, Rudy, I apologize.
01:01:47.620 Did they ever do parabiosis between the OB and the DB?
01:01:50.500 Yes, that was done as well.
01:01:52.500 Okay.
01:01:53.060 Because that would, that should fix the OB.
01:01:56.180 It did.
01:01:57.060 But not the DB.
01:01:58.020 Correct.
01:01:58.420 Okay.
01:01:59.300 Which is another great and elegant example that one of them had the ligand deficiency,
01:02:03.860 the other had the receptor deficiency.
01:02:05.940 God, Mendelian genetics are freaking awesome when they work.
01:02:09.140 Yeah.
01:02:09.540 Well, so that was one of the reasons for using these animals is that you could use the genetics
01:02:14.020 to really help to narrow down the region where these genes had to be located.
01:02:19.220 If it were a polygenic disturbance, it's really, it's a whole different order of business.
01:02:24.020 So basically the DB gene was, or the protein that was nominated to be the DB gene was pulled
01:02:31.860 out of a library of what's called an expression library of choroid plexus by using the OB protein
01:02:38.980 as a probe to see what it stuck to.
01:02:42.020 And that gene that was pulled out of the choroid plexus in that way, we then took and mapped
01:02:51.860 into the DB crosses that we had and showed that that, if you will, nominated gene mapped
01:03:00.180 right in the right place for the DB gene.
01:03:03.860 Which was on chromosome four in the mouse.
01:03:06.100 Correct. And it also turned out that that gene, the DB gene, the leptin receptor, is the mutant
01:03:14.020 in the Zucker rat, which we showed by cloning the gene then out of the Zucker rat, knowing where it was.
01:03:21.700 So this was hailed as one of the most important insights and breakthroughs in all of obesity
01:03:27.460 research. This was what, 1994?
01:03:30.020 4. And then the DB gene a year or two later.
01:03:35.460 What was your expectation at the time? What type of hope did you hold out for
01:03:40.020 the discovery of the gene, but perhaps more importantly, the protein that it coded for?
01:03:45.620 So there were different schools of thought with regard to what this protein actually did. I think
01:03:51.860 one view was that if you saw this as a protein that suppresses food intake, which it definitely
01:03:59.940 does in an OB mouse. If you give it to an OB mouse, you can basically, quote, cure the animal.
01:04:06.980 And if you give it in very high doses to a mouse, it will suppress its food intake.
01:04:12.340 So one view was that this was a weight suppressing hormone. The other view, which was taken by
01:04:21.620 Jeff Flyer, who was at Harvard at the time, later became dean, still at Harvard.
01:04:28.020 Streamson Chua, who was working on this project or had worked on it, and myself, was that the
01:04:34.660 protein was actually more important in its deficiency state as a signal to the brain that you didn't have
01:04:42.020 enough energy to survive under circumstances of a fast or to have enough energy on board to successfully
01:04:48.660 complete a pregnancy. So one view was that very high levels would normally suppress body weight, 0.93
01:04:55.300 although it was hard to imagine at the time. Evolutionarily, that was not a natural state.
01:04:59.620 That's correct. So that's why we were wondering right from the beginning, why would nature invent
01:05:04.340 something that would... Right. It makes more sense that nature would say, here's a hormone that if
01:05:08.820 it's low, is a kick in the pants to eat. That's correct. Or, and maybe other things, right? Maybe
01:05:13.860 prevent you from getting pregnant. Yes. And that's, I think, turned out to be the correct model for how 0.99
01:05:19.220 this hormone, its primary mechanism of action is that it is there to tell the brain that you don't have
01:05:26.180 enough fat. And in an OB mouse, you don't make the hormone leptin, so the brain thinks you don't have
01:05:32.500 any fat. And in the DB mouse, it doesn't receive the signal from the perfectly adequate amounts,
01:05:39.220 actually high levels of leptin, so that the animal again thinks that it's starving.
01:05:44.740 Are there human conditions that mimic the OB and DB condition of the mice?
01:05:49.460 Yes. So there are humans. There are a handful of humans who have mutations of the OB gene and are obese
01:05:56.020 and have many of the phenotypic characteristics of a... And these are patients that you've cured with
01:06:01.700 this by giving... You give these patients leptin and you cure them.
01:06:04.100 Yes. They're curable by giving leptin. And there are a handful, again, of individuals with leptin
01:06:10.260 receptor mutations, which are comparable. How do you help those patients?
01:06:14.900 Those... The leptin won't help. You can't treat them with leptin. And there is no effective intervention
01:06:21.380 for those people at this time, although there are drugs that are being developed that are designed to
01:06:27.460 act downstream of some of the actions of leptin that might, if you could, rectify the activity
01:06:34.580 there. For example, at a receptor called the melanocortin-4 receptor, that would presumably
01:06:41.460 or possibly help to rectify the phenotype of those individuals. Although at present,
01:06:46.340 it's not a proven effective intervention. It might turn out to be.
01:06:50.180 I mean... It wasn't long after the discovery of leptin that... What drug company came in?
01:06:56.180 Amgen.
01:06:56.660 Amgen. So Amgen obviously bought the rights to do this, thinking this could be a blockbuster obesity
01:07:03.380 drug. It turned out not to be because unless you had a leptin deficiency, it didn't seem to help much,
01:07:09.300 right?
01:07:09.620 Correct. There was a major trial of the use of leptin as a therapeutic agent in obese individuals,
01:07:16.900 and neither the obese individuals or the lean individuals who were in the study as controls,
01:07:23.060 responded very much to raising blood levels as much as tenfold above where they were normally
01:07:31.220 located in those individuals. So I just did a blood draw. I've been doing a blood draw on myself
01:07:35.620 every seven days because I'm doing... You know me, Rudy. That's just the shit I do. So my leptin level
01:07:40.820 last Friday was two or less than two. The cutoff was two. So I have a low level of leptin. So if you
01:07:49.140 gave me enough leptin to raise my serum levels to levels that I rarely see clinically, like when I
01:07:55.220 check leptin levels on patients, which I always do, I always want to see leptin. I want to see
01:07:58.740 adiponectin. I want to see insulin. I want to see NIFA, FFA, etc. It's very unusual that I'll see a
01:08:05.540 leptin level, even in an overweight patient, more than about 40 or 50. So if you took me and you gave
01:08:12.020 me that much leptin, do you think it would regulate or depress my appetite in any way?
01:08:17.300 Well, first of all, your leptin is low now because you're not eating. So...
01:08:22.180 Oh, this is even... This is back when I was eating too.
01:08:24.260 Right. So leptin is very highly correlated with body fat. At any level of body fat, if you stop eating,
01:08:31.220 if you restrict calories, the level of leptin will drop by...
01:08:34.260 Within what period of time?
01:08:35.220 Within 12, 18 hours, it'll drop by 50%.
01:08:39.060 So if we check a leptin level on a patient in the morning following a 12-hour fast,
01:08:43.300 we can assume that that's about half what they're fed leptin level is?
01:08:46.660 Well, 12, it depends on what they've been eating. 12 may be a little short in that context. So
01:08:51.780 to be safe, I would say 24.
01:08:54.260 Okay.
01:08:54.620 But it'll start down within 12 hours. So a 12-hour fast will give you a leptin level,
01:08:59.180 which is not what it would be if you were to draw it when the patient is...
01:09:02.700 So let's say my fed level is 2 or 3 or 4. My fasting level is less than 2. If you injected
01:09:10.700 me with enough leptin such that, let's just say my level was now 100, the level that you would see
01:09:15.740 in the highest fed obese patient, what would that do to me?
01:09:20.060 Based on the studies that have been done, the so-called leptin trial, not very much.
01:09:25.420 So interesting.
01:09:26.780 You might have some, at least in some of these individuals, there was some reduction in body
01:09:33.340 weight, but not very significant.
01:09:35.500 Through the mechanism of reducing intake?
01:09:38.140 Yeah, primarily, apparently, yes. Although there weren't detailed formal studies of food
01:09:46.060 intake done in those experiments.
01:09:49.660 Now, going back to the DBs, who obviously have, in many ways, a worse problem. Earlier,
01:09:55.740 you alluded to Prader-Willi. What is the genetic defect in Prader-Willi, and what's the phenotype?
01:10:01.340 So Prader-Willi is a genetic disorder in which, rather than having a single gene affected, there's
01:10:09.100 a region of the genome which is, in most instances, not all, but the majority of instances, deleted.
01:10:15.660 So there's a region of chromosome 15 in which there is a large deletion that is a region that has normally
01:10:25.900 20 or so genes in it. And when deleted, when the paternal, the father's copy of this
01:10:35.180 interval is deleted, the individual becomes, has a very characteristic phenotype. The maternal,
01:10:42.940 the mother's copy, is not expressed. This is called an imprinted region of the genome, which again,
01:10:49.820 for technical reasons, the only one chromosome expresses the genes from that interval. And in the
01:10:57.900 Prader-Willi region, the maternal genes are silenced. So they're there, but they're not expressed.
01:11:03.820 And if you do... So the mom could be a silent carrier. 1.00
01:11:06.380 The mom could be a silent... Carrier is not the right term. 1.00
01:11:10.540 Almost all of these individuals are... All of these individuals are the result of
01:11:17.180 spontaneous deletions that occur after conception. So it's not... So it's sort of polygenic,
01:11:25.180 and you can have... So the one example that is in my world that I get is familial hypercholesterolemia.
01:11:32.620 It's a phenotypic description. There are at least 2,000 known mutations, distinct mutations,
01:11:39.740 that can produce the same phenotype. So in that case, no one really... I don't want to say nobody
01:11:45.420 cares, but it's a lot less interesting to try to map out each and every one of the genes that can
01:11:50.460 lead to familial hypercholesterolemia. It's more important to understand the phenotype and how to
01:11:54.940 treat it. I'm guessing Prader-Willi is not quite that diverse, but is it safe to say, if I'm 0.97
01:12:00.620 understanding you correctly, that you could have two patients with Prader-Willi that will have different
01:12:04.380 genes? There are rare instances of Prader-Willi in which the number of genes deleted, rather than
01:12:12.700 being that large interval that I mentioned, include only three genes, but they're still in the region
01:12:18.540 which is deleted in the large deletion patients. So... So they're necessary and sufficient genes.
01:12:25.020 Yes. We think that those... that smaller region probably has the necessary and sufficient genes,
01:12:31.900 although again, there's debate in the field about this. The children, though, who are affected with
01:12:38.060 this disorder have very characteristic phenotypes. They actually don't grow well. They don't feed well
01:12:43.420 early in life. They actually have failure to thrive. They don't... they're floppy and hard to feed and
01:12:52.300 not very responsive in terms of ingestive behaviors. And then, again, for reasons that are entirely
01:12:59.820 unknown at this point, between the ages of four, five, three years of age, they become hyperphagic. They,
01:13:08.220 again, the drive to eat becomes very, very strong. These are some of the most tragic stories I've ever
01:13:14.860 heard. These children who I've never taken... I'm not a pediatrician, so I've never taken care of them,
01:13:19.740 but I've talked to parents of children. They have to lock the refrigerators. I even had one parent tell
01:13:25.980 me that they actually have to lock the bathroom because the child is so hungry, so hyperphagic,
01:13:31.500 that he would go into the bathroom to try to eat out of the toilet. It's true that in the majority of
01:13:36.780 instances, these children require very close scrutiny of their access to food. And in many instances,
01:13:44.780 the parents or caretakers have to resort to locking up whatever food would otherwise be available to
01:13:53.260 the children. But I think it's important to point out that there are ways of managing this disorder,
01:14:00.220 which has other characteristics. There are many endocrine disturbances that go along with it,
01:14:05.980 including actually growth hormone deficiency. And administration of growth hormone to these
01:14:12.380 children and various other sort of interventions that require a great deal of parental attention,
01:14:19.900 no doubt about that. Some of the severity of the disease is manageable at a clinical level with very
01:14:26.460 high levels of scrutiny by the people who are taking care of them. So that not all children with
01:14:33.020 Prader-Willi will necessarily become hugely obese or suffer the consequences of severe obesity.
01:14:40.540 This is one of those things where I hope, I know there are folks out there trying to raise money to
01:14:44.860 do clinical trials in this because anecdotally, again, there are these very interesting stories.
01:14:49.820 The first I ever heard of this was probably four years ago. I was giving a talk. I don't even
01:14:54.140 remember where it was. It was in Chicago, but I can't even recall the audience. But afterwards,
01:14:58.300 a woman came up to me and I was giving a talk about, I don't know, longevity, like it wasn't an obesity
01:15:04.860 specific talk or anything like that. But a woman came up to me and introduced herself and said her 0.97
01:15:08.540 son had Prader-Willi and was going off the rails, et cetera. And at about the age of seven or eight,
01:15:14.140 she put him on a ketogenic diet. And it corrected the phenotype, including the cognitive developmental
01:15:22.220 part, which often accompanies this. She then, I guess, since that time had formed kind of a support
01:15:29.020 group and you had more and more of these parents that were putting their Prader-Willi kids onto
01:15:34.140 ketogenic diets. Again, it's very difficult to draw much of a conclusion when you don't have controlled
01:15:39.500 data and you have obviously the selection biases that go into these things. But it struck me as very
01:15:45.180 interesting. Do the Prader-Willi kids, are they hyperinsulinemic? They are hyperinsulinemic to the
01:15:52.860 level that would be anticipated based on their degree of adiposity. And in some research that
01:16:01.260 we've done very recently using some of the stem cell techniques, or at least using stem cells that I
01:16:07.260 alluded to much earlier, we've got some evidence that suggests that one of the major consequences of
01:16:17.740 deleting this region of the chromosome 15 by mechanisms that are somewhat complicated
01:16:26.060 influence the expression of an enzyme called proconvertase 1. And this enzyme is critical for
01:16:35.260 for the processing of many of the hormones and neuropeptides that are made in the body.
01:16:42.060 Virtually all hormones and neuropeptides are made as pro-hormones, that is, precursor hormones
01:16:47.900 that are then processed by proconvertase 1. And that is what produces or generates the mature
01:16:57.420 form of the hormone or neuropeptide. And we think, actually, that the phenotype,
01:17:03.260 many of the phenotypes of the Prader-Willi patients may, in fact, be due to a deficiency or under-activity
01:17:11.420 of proconvertase 1, which is not in the interval where this deletion occurs, but is influenced downstream
01:17:18.860 by one or another of the genes in that interval. And it's relevant in the question of insulin, because
01:17:27.020 insulin is processed by proconvertase. So, some of the-
01:17:30.780 That's where the C-peptide gets cleaved off the pre-hormone.
01:17:33.340 That's correct. So, some of the hyperinsulinemia of the Prader-Willi might be pro-insulin.
01:17:41.660 Proinsulin has biological activity, but much lower than native insulin. And so, if this turns out to
01:17:49.660 be the case, then it might be possible to rectify some of the Prader-Willi phenotypes by
01:17:57.100 by being able to increase the activity of proconvertase 1, pharmacologically or by other means.
01:18:04.460 So, there's all this incredible work, all this incredible molecular biology and molecular
01:18:08.780 genetics that's identified leptin deficiency, leptoreceptor deficiencies, the cluster of defects
01:18:14.620 that lead to Prader-Willi. And yet, the question is, how much do these things tell us about the more
01:18:21.980 broad condition of obesity that afflicts, I don't even know the stats, I don't really keep track
01:18:27.740 of this stuff anymore, but I don't know what, a third of Americans are probably obese now?
01:18:32.060 Mm-hmm.
01:18:33.580 So, I'll tell you, an interesting perspective on that question is, and I mentioned it earlier,
01:18:40.620 while we were doing the efforts to clone these genes, I was studying patients in the clinical
01:18:47.100 research center with Jules Hirsch, Mike Rosenbaum, long-standing associates. And what we were doing
01:18:53.740 is looking at the metabolic consequences of weight reduction and showing that if you reduce the body
01:18:58.940 weight of a human by 10%, 20%, you get a reduction in energy expenditure, which is greater than what you
01:19:06.220 would predict from the loss of just body size or that they're...
01:19:10.700 In other words, their metabolic rate didn't reduce just to support the new reduced weight,
01:19:15.980 it reduced even further, which would almost try to return them to a heavier weight.
01:19:20.700 Right. So, they had a disproportionate reduction in energy expenditure, and some of the data
01:19:27.900 suggested that the major change in energy expenditure was not in resting metabolic rate,
01:19:34.460 but in the energy cost of low levels of physical activity, of muscle work, so to speak, but at very
01:19:41.820 low levels of activity. And we went on to show that, as you would expect, based on a lot of what we've
01:19:51.180 been talking about, the leptin levels were low in these individuals, low but proportional to the
01:19:56.460 reduced amount of body fat. So, one hypothesis that we had is that this reduction in energy expenditure
01:20:02.380 was, in fact, a reflection of the fact that the body was sensing the reduction in low in leptin and
01:20:10.060 interpreting that as a starvation state. That is, for that individual, that new lower body weight
01:20:16.860 represented a threat, if you will, to survival or reproduction. And we've done experiments
01:20:23.180 subsequently in which we've injected leptin into those individuals. None of them has a genetic
01:20:28.620 lesion of leptin gene. So, they're just weight-reduced.
01:20:30.700 They're just weight-reduced normal individuals. We've put leptin back into them by injection to
01:20:37.260 raise the blood level back to where it was before they lost their body weight. So, these are very low
01:20:42.540 doses of leptin. And that intervention will restore their energy expenditure back to where it was before
01:20:51.500 they lost the body weight, even though they're now still maintaining the lower body weight.
01:20:57.340 So, put this in some quantitative terms for me. That infusion of leptin gave them how many more
01:21:04.700 kcal per day in energy expenditure, all things equal between movement, activity, et cetera?
01:21:10.780 You're talking about 100 kcal a day? Like, what kind of a delta are you producing?
01:21:14.140 Two or 300, because these are big people to start with.
01:21:17.900 That's huge. And that's a huge delta.
01:21:19.260 Right. And we could show that that effect is primarily being conveyed through skeletal muscle.
01:21:25.180 So, what happens is that the muscle becomes less efficient, if you want to think about it that way,
01:21:32.060 after the leptin administration.
01:21:33.820 So, there are two ways that we broadly in the research setting measure energy expenditure,
01:21:39.340 indirect calorimetry and doubly labeled water. Can you spend a second explaining each of those?
01:21:44.700 So, indirect calorimetry is really classical physics, if you will, in which the rate of oxygen consumption
01:21:54.060 and the rate of carbon dioxide are measured in a number of ways. The most frequent is to put a mask or
01:22:02.460 hood over the head of the individual in whom the measurement is made and simply use gas sensors and flow
01:22:09.340 meters to quantify the amount of oxygen consumed and CO2 released. And from that information,
01:22:17.100 one can quite easily calculate how many kcals of energy are being expended to correlate, if you will,
01:22:25.980 to account for the amount of oxygen consumed and the CO2 produced. And by looking at the ratio of
01:22:32.220 those two, one can even get a indication of the kind of fuel that's being burned to support the
01:22:40.940 metabolic rate.
01:22:41.980 So, the V, and I'll just spit it out, so folks can, if they're, we'll link to all of this stuff,
01:22:47.180 but the RQ or the respiratory quotient is the ratio of CO2 produced or VCO2 divided by
01:22:54.620 the amount of oxygen consumed or the VO2. And that'll vary sort of between, you know,
01:22:59.500 typically about 0.7 and 1, right? Correct.
01:23:02.140 You can see it outside of those ranges. The lower it is, the more they're partitioning and drawing
01:23:07.420 from fat. The higher it is, the more they're drawing from glycogen. Correct.
01:23:11.980 And if I still remember my Weir coefficients, energy expenditure is something to the effect
01:23:16.460 of 3.94 times the VO2 plus 1.11 times the VCO2. Well, your memory is better than mine, right?
01:23:23.980 I can't recite you the Weir equation off the top of my head.
01:23:26.780 You know, it's really funny. About five years ago, I asked Kevin Hall to send me
01:23:31.100 the derivation of it, and it was so great to get this page, two pages of differential equations,
01:23:38.620 so I could go through and actually see how the Weir coefficients were described.
01:23:43.100 Which, of course, then led to the inevitable question that you and I have talked about in
01:23:45.980 the past, which is, do those coefficients hold in the presence of radical dietary change,
01:23:52.700 such as, you know, a very, very low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet, or the opposite.
01:23:57.660 So then, if that's how indirect calorimetry works, and of course, by the way, these things happen in
01:24:02.700 metabolic chambers. That's the ultimate way to do it, right? Where you can put a person into a room,
01:24:06.380 and the room itself has all of these sensors embedded in it.
01:24:09.980 Right. And that's exactly the same principle, but there, the individual's not restricted in
01:24:14.780 terms of their motion, other than in the room that they're in. So you can get exactly the same
01:24:20.380 information, but over a much longer period of time. I mean, you can do it for days.
01:24:24.060 There was a point when I wanted to build one of these at my home. I was so obsessed with knowing
01:24:29.820 every... I wanted to know, like, my VO2 and VCO2 almost every minute of the day. And then I found
01:24:35.820 out it would cost at least five million to build one and realized I couldn't build one. But I thought,
01:24:39.420 boy, if I ever make enough money to build one of those, that's a great fun... That's like,
01:24:45.100 that's fun for the whole family, if you really stop to think about it, you know? I mean, who wouldn't
01:24:49.020 want to go sit in the metabolic chamber on the weekend, just kicking it, watching football?
01:24:53.660 We just built one of these actually at Columbia, and it's quite a... You're right. It's not only
01:24:59.900 expensive, but requires a great deal of attention to things like leaks and airflow and...
01:25:06.700 You know, I broke one once.
01:25:09.180 Doing what?
01:25:10.860 So you'll recall, I used to spend time in these chambers, and I guess I exceeded the level of
01:25:15.980 CO2 production that it was sort of calibrated for because I was on my bicycle, and I was riding
01:25:20.540 pretty vigorously, and the CO2 sensor broke. And it's one of those things where you don't get a big
01:25:25.500 red flag. It was just after the fact that data didn't make sense. And this is where you appreciate
01:25:29.500 what you're saying, which is the engineering in this thing is amazing. And so you got to pour through,
01:25:34.460 you know, the longest spreadsheets in the world to start to look for where the mistakes are.
01:25:38.780 But it's really beautiful stuff. And there's not many of these in the country. Like, there's...
01:25:43.260 Obviously, Columbia has some. NIH has some. TRI has some. Pennington has some. Baylor has some.
01:25:50.460 I mean, there are not many.
01:25:52.780 Like you said, they're tricky to construct and require high level of attention to their
01:25:58.700 maintenance and operation. It's not just like going down in your basement and measuring your RQ.
01:26:05.340 So how does doubly labeled water work, which I also have had the privilege of ingesting?
01:26:10.540 So doubly labeled water is a technique which uses two isotopes of water, which is H2O.
01:26:20.220 In one, the oxygen is a heavier version of the normal or the more prevalent oxygen molecule. And the
01:26:29.660 other, the hydrogen is a heavy atom as opposed to the more prevalent kind of hydrogen in the environment.
01:26:39.740 And what you do is you can give these as a mixture. You have to know exactly how much of each one you've
01:26:45.820 given. But you can give this as a drink, basically, of what amounts to heavy isotope labeled water.
01:26:53.500 And then look at the relative concentration of these two isotopes. You can do it in blood. You can do it in
01:27:02.540 urine. We often do it in both. And the difference in the rate of excretion of the so-called O18 water, the heavy isotope of water,
01:27:13.180 which is oxygen is borne out both in urine, but also in the expired air of an individual as carbon dioxide.
01:27:23.020 And the H2O, which comes out by non-respiratory means, you can actually get a measure of how much CO2
01:27:32.940 the individual is producing. And you can use that and the nature of the diet that the individual is on
01:27:42.540 to back-calculate from what would be the RQ back to the oxygen consumption.
01:27:48.220 So you would use the FQ, basically.
01:27:51.000 Yes, correct.
01:27:51.380 So the FQ is if you stuck the person's food into a bomb calorimeter, burned it, that would produce the RQ. 0.64
01:27:58.140 So the limitation of this is a couple things. One, the patient's got to be weight stable, right? This
01:28:05.180 starts to fall flat when they're losing or gaining tremendous amounts of weight. And two, you have to
01:28:10.680 have a pretty darn good idea of what they're eating. So each of these methods, ingenious and completely
01:28:16.100 distinct, both have huge limitations. The former, of course, requires an artificial environment. They
01:28:22.820 don't get to be free living. And you can't really study them for that long. But the latter, where they
01:28:28.600 can be free living and you can study them for, you know, two weeks at a time with a single ingestion
01:28:33.680 of the doubly labeled water, you better make sure that they're not gaining and losing weight. And you
01:28:38.380 better make sure you know exactly what they're eating. And in an ideal world, it better be the same
01:28:42.440 thing almost every day, right?
01:28:44.060 And in general, because of the issues that you just mentioned, I think most investigators in
01:28:52.620 this field prefer, at least in terms of its nominal accuracy, the room calorimeter over
01:29:00.740 the doubly labeled water. But the doubly labeled water does have the virtue, as you pointed out,
01:29:06.580 of being applicable over much longer periods of time so that you can get integrated idea of
01:29:13.540 how much energy an individual is expending over literally days or even weeks. What's sometimes
01:29:20.800 done is to re-dose the individual at some point in the experiment and simply continue it.
01:29:27.600 So when I did this, I did several days in several chambers and then separately did the LW.
01:29:34.500 I was kind of amazed at how closely they overlapped. Of course, it was hard to replicate my chamber
01:29:40.520 activity in the real world because there's so much more, you know, movement outside of the chamber,
01:29:46.500 but they were surprisingly in line, which is interesting because at the time I was on a
01:29:50.900 ketogenic diet, which there's a lot of things that could be changing there. So I want to go back to
01:29:57.080 something that we kind of got into a little bit, but it's, to me, it's one of the most fascinating
01:30:00.940 discussions slash debates, which is the idea of appetite being regulated centrally versus peripherally.
01:30:10.360 And you and I have had some incredible dinners having these discussions. And I've always found
01:30:17.260 your perspectives to be interesting because I think few people are more qualified to talk about
01:30:23.480 that in that they know so much about both. I mean, in many ways, leptin at its inception was really
01:30:31.040 viewed as a peripheral way to regulate appetite. So let me explain what I mean by that for the listener.
01:30:36.500 When you're hungry, are you, is this all being driven by what your brain is saying?
01:30:42.260 Is it possible that somewhere outside of the brain, which we refer to as the periphery, your liver,
01:30:47.500 your fat cells, your muscles, the level of blood glucose that's circulating, is there some other
01:30:52.720 signal? You know, it's kind of interesting that here we are in the year 2018 and it's still not
01:30:59.200 entirely clear where appetite is regulated. So how has your thinking on this topic evolved?
01:31:06.500 through your own immense knowledge of both the central and peripheral components of appetite.
01:31:13.760 You want to take a sip of that Topo Chico before you try to answer that? For the listener,
01:31:17.840 I've introduced Rudy to Topo Chico today. So he's, one sip into it, he declared it the finest bottled
01:31:23.000 water. I would describe the system, you know, from high altitude as the following, that there are
01:31:29.580 CNS, central nervous system mechanisms. They're not all in the hypothalamus, but many of them are. And
01:31:37.600 many of those that aren't do interact with the hypothalamus. And that that can be regarded,
01:31:43.960 that organ or set of cells can be regarded as the integrating center for basically the reception of
01:31:54.200 signals that are of relevance to how an organism ought to respond to its environment in terms of
01:32:01.380 food intake and also for control of some of the aspects of energy expenditure that are not necessarily
01:32:10.880 under voluntary control, such as autonomic nervous system. And what's coming into that system
01:32:17.440 is, I think, broader than we had originally anticipated. So clearly, leptin is an example of
01:32:26.280 a hormone that's secreted from adipose tissue. But there are many other peptides, actually,
01:32:32.080 or hormones that come out of adipose tissue. There are neural signals that are now being identified.
01:32:40.120 That is, nerve-borne signals that look like they're coming out of and going into adipose tissue that may be
01:32:46.820 playing a much more important role than we had sort of previously appreciated. The gastrointestinal
01:32:53.220 tract, which for obvious reasons is a very relevant aspect of the system, originally was, I think,
01:33:01.680 regarded pretty much the way that adipose tissue was, as a tube that absorbed your calories and didn't
01:33:08.160 really participate actively in the regulation of that aspect of biology. Clearly, the advent of
01:33:16.820 various surgeries for control of body weight have indicated that that sort of premise is
01:33:23.620 incorrect. That is, that there are very powerful influences of the gastrointestinal tract, which are
01:33:29.020 brought out by some of the surgeries that are done. And it's now very clear that the gastrointestinal
01:33:35.380 tract, at many levels, is communicating with the brain, both by products that it secretes and by direct
01:33:44.320 neural input, probably primarily, but not entirely via the vagus nerve into the brainstem and then
01:33:51.420 further up into the brain. So just, you know, taking that as a sort of very broad picture,
01:34:00.180 it's much clearer now that there is no sort of single definitive part of the biology of an individual
01:34:10.500 which is dictating this very complex system. It's really a product of the interaction of these
01:34:16.300 peripheral signals, as you referred to them, including metabolites, such as glucose and free
01:34:22.400 fatty acids and so forth, and the central nervous system, not just the hypothalamus, but areas like
01:34:29.660 the brainstem, the amygdala, the frontal cortex. There's many other areas of the brain that interact with
01:34:35.320 these signals to influence both the behaviors and the unconscious, if you will, the vegetative
01:34:42.680 responses that ultimately go into the regulation of body weight. So I think it's obviously a very
01:34:50.980 complex and overdetermined system. And it's that way because it is absolutely critical to survival.
01:34:59.440 So it's not surprising in a way that it's as complex as it is. But I think what it clearly does is it
01:35:06.680 introduces all sorts of possibilities for mischief with regard to body weight regulation, starting in
01:35:14.940 the frontal cortex where decisions are made, at least with regard to some aspects of this, all the way down
01:35:21.180 into the colon where you've got large numbers of bacteria that are producing things, metabolites and
01:35:28.340 molecules themselves that, again, we're only just beginning to understand. So we're not only talking
01:35:35.140 about a regulatory system that has all of these elements, but a bunch of organisms literally living
01:35:40.900 within us that are influencing it in ways that I don't think we've really fully understood. The
01:35:46.940 miracle is actually when you think about all the ways that it could go wrong, that it doesn't go wrong
01:35:53.640 anymore than it actually does. And it looks to me like the major problem in terms of the obesity that
01:36:03.180 you referred to earlier that's increasing has to do a great deal with the environment and what people
01:36:09.740 are being exposed to that's very novel with regard to the system. I mean, this system was not designed
01:36:16.840 for the regulation of metabolism and body weight in an environment in which, with a cell phone, you can
01:36:24.200 bring literally as many calories as you want into your living room without getting up off your behind.
01:36:32.940 So we're dealing with an organism which has this very complex and beautiful system designed to regulate
01:36:39.420 various aspects of the biology, which is now in an environment which is entirely, at least in many
01:36:46.440 regards, novel to the system. And it fails in the sense that there's a lot more obesity than there was
01:36:55.240 prior to the environment that we've been able to create. But it's not totally dysregulated. I think people
01:37:04.400 are just now regulating their body weights at somewhat higher levels than they were in other
01:37:10.700 circumstances.
01:37:12.480 Again, I don't follow the statistics. It's not something I'm paying huge attention to. But
01:37:16.840 are the rates of obesity plateauing or are they still increasing? Or is the curve concave up or concave down?
01:37:24.140 So several years ago, it looked like the rates were either slowing down or level. Now it looks like maybe
01:37:32.000 they're continuing to inch up, but not as rapidly as they were, say, a decade ago. So there's been
01:37:38.040 some relenting of the rate of increase, excuse me, in obesity in both adults and children. But it
01:37:45.960 looks like it's still rising, although at a lower rate.
01:37:50.420 Do you have concern that there are epigenetic implications of this, that 10,000 years ago,
01:37:57.880 the prevalence of obesity, again, largely probably driven by the environment that made it pretty
01:38:04.800 hard to become obese? Not just in terms of food availability, in terms of absolute calories,
01:38:09.940 but presumably the types of calories that were available. I mean, I think my recollection is that
01:38:14.720 10,000 years ago, nothing came in a package, right?
01:38:17.600 As far as we know.
01:38:18.660 So we didn't have Pop-Tarts, we didn't have breakfast cereal, we didn't have orange juice,
01:38:26.800 we didn't have French fries and whatever else are the culprit potentials. So if Johnny got a set of
01:38:34.160 genes that were slightly suboptimal, Johnny Jr. probably got some of those suboptimal genes, but
01:38:41.460 there was nothing being imprinted on the genome that was being transmitted to generations. And
01:38:48.620 I mean, what do you think about this idea that we could be reaching kind of a dangerous point
01:38:54.600 in the evolution of our species where children, maybe during critical windows of development,
01:39:00.800 if exposed to, you know, again, in my opinion, it's probably a lot of the sort of really highly
01:39:06.660 refined crap, high amounts of fructose that we're seeing with the NAFLD, that this is setting them up
01:39:12.480 for a real problem later in life. It's going to make it a lot harder, not just for them to lose
01:39:17.260 weight one day, but also for their offspring. Is there any evidence of that?
01:39:21.940 I think there is evidence that's, I'm not so sure I would use the term imprinting. That has
01:39:29.020 sort of specific biological meaning and implications. I mean, we could talk about that in a minute, but
01:39:35.800 if what you're saying is, are there perhaps critical periods of development in a child in which if the
01:39:47.180 child is caused to become more obese than he or she might be in some other environment, that that will
01:39:54.960 leave a mark on the regulatory system that will then cause that individual to want to sustain or
01:40:01.900 maintain a higher body weight? I think the answer is probably, or at least possibly yes. That is that
01:40:09.760 there may be critical periods in human development. Certainly, I think the data are also available to
01:40:19.520 some extent in animal studies that suggest that if you manipulate body weight or some of these systems
01:40:27.060 at critical periods of development, you end up with an animal which is more likely to be obese as an
01:40:34.940 adult than if you hadn't done that. And exactly what the molecular and neuroanatomical or other
01:40:43.580 physiological consequences of that manipulation are that lead to the maintenance of a higher body weight,
01:40:51.780 this is obviously a critical area of study. It's actually something that people in my lab are quite
01:40:58.940 interested in. That is whether we can impose by dietary or other manipulations a higher body weight
01:41:06.500 or a higher sustained body weight in an animal by early manipulations, either by diet or endocrine
01:41:13.960 manipulations. And I think the answer is probably yes. But what is the consequence of that in terms of the
01:41:23.120 regulatory elements that we were talking about? We don't yet know. Another aspect or another perspective
01:41:31.520 on this is the following question. If you manipulate the metabolism of a pregnant animal or human,
01:41:40.540 what are the consequences of that on the developing brain or physiology of the fetus?
01:41:48.200 I mean, there's evidence now that a mother who is hyperinsulinemic or has gestational diabetes is 0.95
01:41:54.700 increasing the child's risk of obesity. Is that not the case? There are data that suggests that-
01:41:59.860 It's registry data, so it's hard to know. Right. But that obesity in a pregnant woman does confer 1.00
01:42:08.020 by, again, by mechanisms that we don't understand, higher risk of obesity in her offspring. 0.89
01:42:16.240 Although I'd love to see it stratified by hyperinsulinemic versus non-hyperinsulinemic obesity.
01:42:21.740 Because I feel like I remember reading that it also seems to be dependent on the gestational stage.
01:42:28.280 In other words, like when the dorsal and ventral buds of the pancreas are forming,
01:42:32.640 which I can't even remember when that is, maybe week seven, eight, nine, something like that.
01:42:36.060 Those are very critical windows, right? That's when islet cell formation is taking place and
01:42:41.560 nutrient exposure or insulin exposure during that period of time could have a more profound effect
01:42:46.520 than say late in the third trimester where perhaps it's not as effective. Again, very, I mean, I'm just,
01:42:52.680 I don't follow this literature, so I don't want to sound like a complete moron. And the last time I
01:42:58.080 really paid attention to this stuff was probably four years ago. And it was, again, largely registry-based
01:43:02.880 data, so very difficult to know cause versus effect.
01:43:07.500 Again, you know, the literature, as you sort of implied, is wobbly on this point. But I'll just
01:43:14.900 tell you about a couple of experiments, actually, that we've done. One to answer, to address this
01:43:20.200 question of hyperinsulinemia in a dam, in a pregnant animal, and its effects on the fetus.
01:43:27.520 We were able to do an experiment in which we were interested in separating the issue of
01:43:34.140 high body weight and adiposity from the effect of insulin itself. And so we actually used a genetic
01:43:42.480 model of hyperinsulinemia and were able to make the dams hyperinsulinemic without being obese.
01:43:48.300 So these are perfectly normal body weight dams that were very hyperinsulinemic. And the pups that
01:43:55.720 they were carrying, some of those pups had no abnormality of any insulin-related genes. So they
01:44:02.620 were what we would call wild-type pups being incubated in a hyperinsulinemic dam. And we were very
01:44:08.980 interested to see what the consequences would be on the metabolism and body weight of these animals.
01:44:14.200 And very interestingly, these animals showed transient elevations of body weight and body fat
01:44:24.700 when they were in what I guess we would describe as adolescent period of a mouse, which tended to
01:44:31.980 revert back to normal over time. You could definitely see an effect in the body weight and metabolism of
01:44:39.560 the mouse, but it appeared to be transient. And to be clear, the mother was euglycemic?
01:44:46.040 The mother was euglycemic and hyperinsulinemic. That's a tough needle to thread, my friend.
01:44:51.040 Yes. So again, it's the power of genetics. So we could do that. So these kind of experiments,
01:44:55.760 we also looked at the brains of these animals, and there were some very subtle differences in the
01:45:00.480 way the hypothalamic cells, the numbers of different types of hypothalamic cells, which suggested
01:45:05.940 in sort of support of the inference of your implication of your question, there are consequences
01:45:14.180 of these metabolic states of the dam that can influence the subsequent development of the pup,
01:45:21.320 even if the pup doesn't have the genetic etiology that led to the derangement, if you want to call
01:45:27.980 it that, in the dam. We've more recently been doing some experiments along these lines looking at
01:45:33.500 leptin in a similar way, and again, can see evidence of influence, long-term influence of
01:45:40.060 manipulations of leptin in this way, which again suggests that these transient periods of exposure
01:45:46.640 at various levels or various periods of development can have long-term consequences for organisms that
01:45:54.840 don't themselves have any primary abnormality of these genes or their functions.
01:46:01.720 So I think this probably supports the notion that there are things going on in the environment
01:46:08.080 that are not reversible once the environment is necessarily reversed. That is, the exposure to
01:46:15.040 the environment may change the biology in such a way that even when the insult, if you want to call
01:46:21.780 it that, is removed, the biology is permanently impacted.
01:46:27.120 We've spent a long time talking about low-carbohydrate diets. You were part of one of the
01:46:33.620 studies that was funded by NUSI, and while the study that you were a major part of was not a diet
01:46:40.320 study, so I wasn't really looking at diets, it used diets as a tool to ask questions. Clinically,
01:46:46.240 we know that low-carbohydrate diets are very effective. I think it would be very difficult for
01:46:50.940 people to dispute that at this point in time. The interesting question, if you're rudely liable,
01:46:57.580 is why? What do you think? Why do these diets seem so effective for so many people? Let's not even
01:47:04.700 get into the fancy stuff about the diabetes reversal and stuff like that, where I think
01:47:08.560 the results are especially pronounced, but just in terms of obesity reduction, why do you think these
01:47:13.400 things work? I guess my view of this is that to the extent that diet composition has an effect on
01:47:21.460 body weight, which clearly it can, that this is the result of the interaction of the components of
01:47:33.000 the diet with aspects of the regulatory control of food intake. I guess the way I describe this is
01:47:41.220 the sort of hedonic aspects of the food that's being ingested will influence the drive to ingest that
01:47:51.680 particular food. I think individuals differ in terms of their sensitivity or susceptibility to diets of
01:47:58.360 different composition, and there clearly are some individuals who, when fed or offered or impose
01:48:07.360 diets that have pretty radical compositional differences, will respond very well. In other
01:48:15.620 words, there are people who respond well to high-carb diets, there are people who respond well to low-carb
01:48:20.740 diets. I think that it's primarily some aspect of the hedonics of these diets, if you want to call it
01:48:29.720 that, that's driving the favorable response. I know, and I'm sure you and I have discussed this many, many
01:48:37.260 times, there are individuals who view the diet composition as having, in addition to what effects
01:48:44.160 I just described, also an impact on energy homeostasis itself, meaning that the composition of the diet can
01:48:51.900 influence the degree of caloric expenditure per unit of calories ingested. I'm not a sort of strong
01:49:01.820 proponent of that view. I guess I try to remain agnostic about it, but my bias, if you want to call
01:49:09.340 it that, from my experience is that that's right. Diet composition can have an effect on body weight. It
01:49:15.840 doesn't do so by effects primarily, or maybe at all, on energy expenditure per se, but can have pretty
01:49:24.540 striking effects on an individual's desire to eat those calories delivered in that form.
01:49:31.580 And so, there's two ways to think about that, right? Again, if you leave the energy expenditure side
01:49:36.140 away, on the intake side, is it the case that a low-carbohydrate diet, as you say, it's purely a hedonic
01:49:43.020 issue. People just, when they're on these diets, they're just not as hungry because, I don't know,
01:49:47.280 the food is not as diverse or not as palatable. An alternative viewpoint is they eat a lot less
01:49:52.200 because they're eating themselves more. In other words, they're, you know, the way I try to explain
01:49:56.220 this to my patients when we're talking about nutrition is, you want to differentiate between
01:50:00.960 exogenous and endogenous calories. So, you know, most people walk around, if they're weight stable,
01:50:06.640 purely subsiding on exogenous calories. But if you want to lose weight, by definition,
01:50:11.340 you must start to consume endogenous calories. You have to start eating yourself.
01:50:16.480 And this gets back to the question of the regulation of body weight peripherally. If you
01:50:23.620 are eating yourself, can the CNS figure that out and say, hey, we've got all this lipolysis going on.
01:50:30.620 We're liberating all of this fat out of a fat cell. That's energy. Fantastic. I will program the
01:50:38.180 system. You need less exogenously. So those are two kind of very different ideas, right? The one is
01:50:43.680 just, hey, this food is boring and doesn't taste great. I'm just going to eat less of it. Personally,
01:50:48.540 I don't find that theory as appealing because having worked with so many patients that do this,
01:50:53.000 if that were the case, I'd suspect they'd be more hungry, but yet they don't seem to be very hungry,
01:50:58.320 which is, I think for most people, the only thing that's intolerable over long periods of time is
01:51:04.540 hunger. You know, you look back at the Ancel Keys starvation experiments and those guys weren't
01:51:09.700 really like, you know, what they were eating, like what, maybe 1600 calories a day, but they were
01:51:13.900 losing their minds, right? I mean, these guys lost their minds on 1600 calories per day. So
01:51:20.820 starvation is clearly an unacceptable state in the long run. I got to be honest with you. I'm glad I
01:51:27.080 don't work on this problem. I'm much more interested in just trying to figure out this other easy
01:51:31.100 problem of longevity. But this obesity thing is a real bear. Because at the same time, as much
01:51:37.460 success as I've seen for people on low carbohydrate diets, I also know that they don't work for
01:51:41.360 everybody. And therein lies the challenge of why? Why would something, I mean, again, it's a naive
01:51:50.520 question in the sense that you've just spent the last two hours explaining some of the most complex
01:51:55.480 biology of obesity. Why should everyone respond to the same treatment? But it does. It really frustrates
01:52:04.020 me that there are certain patients in which no matter what one does or no matter what they do,
01:52:09.580 you know, I think patients that try really, really hard and can't lose weight, I find that to be a very
01:52:14.420 frustrating clinical problem. So I guess maybe I should rephrase the way I answered your question.
01:52:21.460 And that is to say that I believe that the composition of the diet can influence aspects of
01:52:29.100 ingestive behavior. I emphasize the hedonic aspect, but I'm certainly open to the possibility
01:52:37.560 that if you feed a diet of, you know, divergent composition, you will definitely have some influence.
01:52:46.540 I mean, this is well documented on the substrates that are in the circulation as a result of feeding
01:52:52.440 that diet. Those substrates themselves, metabolites, you were mentioning fatty acid, but many other
01:52:59.020 things change, may themselves have a effect on the drive to eat. I'm sympathetic to that idea.
01:53:07.720 And exactly in any given individual who does or doesn't respond to a specific diet, which of the
01:53:14.380 mechanisms, you know, whether it's occurring at the level of the taste of the diet or some of the
01:53:21.960 metabolic consequences of the diet, I would say to the extent that somebody is successful in
01:53:27.840 losing weight on that diet, A, they have to be in negative energy balance. That is, there's no way that
01:53:33.860 they can eat the number of calories that they're expending and lose weight. So they need to be in
01:53:39.960 negative energy balance. And I mean, that's just a given. And then the mechanism by which the diet
01:53:46.460 composition influences the success of their ability to sustain a hypocaloric state, which as you pointed
01:53:53.400 out, is uncomfortable. I'm open to the possibility that it could be at any level of the sort of neural
01:54:01.920 circuitry that regulates food intake. It could be very proximal in terms of taste aspects, but it could
01:54:10.040 also be some of the mechanisms that you mentioned. I think that's perfectly reasonable. How that works,
01:54:18.100 as you pointed out, is a tough nut to figure out. And I think, like you said, there are individuals who
01:54:26.380 respond very well to diets of quite divergent composition, but they have to be taking less
01:54:33.240 calories than they are spending. Right. And that's an easy thing to do mathematically. It's a very hard
01:54:39.760 thing to do clinically because, again, I think patients can tolerate a lot, but I don't think
01:54:45.500 people can tolerate hunger for very long. I think to ask somebody to be constantly hungry
01:54:51.020 is a losing proposition. And that's why I believe clinically low carbohydrate diets seem to be more
01:54:59.000 satiating. And again, whether they're satiating because of something in their composition or whether
01:55:05.420 they're just satiating because you end up eating more of yourself. I mean, I've seen lots of patients
01:55:10.000 who, and this has even been published, who on 16, 1700 calories a day of a ketogenic diet seem
01:55:16.520 completely fine. And yet Ancel Keys' patients at 1,400, 1,500, 1,600, 700 calories of basically
01:55:22.640 very high carbohydrate diet, very low fat diets, lost their minds. What did you believe 10 years
01:55:29.860 ago that you don't believe today to be true? I think over the past decade, the field of the
01:55:37.280 sort of neuroscience of body weight regulation or ingested behavior and energy expenditure has expanded
01:55:44.040 the role of other elements in the central nervous system beyond what began as our very intense
01:55:52.680 focus on the hypothalamus. Partly that's historical and for reasons having to do with the tractability
01:55:58.920 of some of the cell types and mechanisms in the hypothalamus. But I would say the biggest change
01:56:04.760 in my thinking about this has been that these supra-hypothalamic aspects of the central nervous
01:56:12.660 system, again, starting with the cortex and working down, have a much stronger, I think,
01:56:19.500 ultimate impact on this regulatory system than the way I perceived it a decade ago. And what this does
01:56:27.000 is it opens up, I think, a lot of very interesting aspects of the biology that maybe we weren't either
01:56:34.560 capable of or didn't focus on adequately, part of which actually is in response to the point you were
01:56:40.840 just raising. That is, what is the effect of diet composition on hunger and so forth? It's almost
01:56:47.480 certainly an aspect of this sort of view of the broader central nervous system impact on ingested
01:56:55.700 behavior than just the hypothalamus. You know, my mentor, Jules Hirsch, I think, who unfortunately
01:57:02.820 passed away. He passed away about four years ago? Yeah, three years ago. He would agree with this. I
01:57:08.080 mean, he always, I think, was suspicious of focusing, you know, slavishly, if you will, on the hypothalamus
01:57:16.760 as the center for all of this. He always, I think, had a much broader perspective on some of the
01:57:23.180 psycho-affective aspects, as he would describe them, of ingestive behavior. And I think he would see the
01:57:30.160 sort of flowering of broader view of some of these regulatory aspects of food intake to other parts
01:57:37.600 of the central nervous system. He would say, I told you so. And he was right. I think he's looking
01:57:43.360 down at you saying that. Yeah, he's probably saying a lot of other stuff too. If we could wave a magic
01:57:50.200 wand and not only were resources unlimited, but more importantly, any of the technical considerations
01:57:56.600 that make this type of study challenging were just ameliorated, what's the dream experiment you
01:58:02.740 would want to do? If you got one more shot at this, you could spend the rest of your career
01:58:07.260 doing a dream experiment with infinite resources, infinite subject participation. Screw the ethics.
01:58:14.800 There's no IRB. You've got a bunch of clones out of Westworld. You can do whatever the hell you want.
01:58:19.420 What experiment do you want to do? Once to take your final kick at this problem.
01:58:26.600 There is a gene that was identified now 10, 12 years ago.
01:58:33.580 FTO?
01:58:34.360 Yes.
01:58:34.880 You tested me for this.
01:58:36.260 Yes.
01:58:37.600 I was negative.
01:58:39.200 Right. It was identified by Mark McCarthy and some other investigators in Great Britain
01:58:44.060 as sending the strongest genetic signal for obesity or elevated body fat, not severe effect,
01:58:52.980 but the strongest statistical signal ever detected in humans. It remains the same.
01:58:59.880 The prevalence of the variants that are associated with higher body fat are very high in the general
01:59:06.180 population. So there are a lot of these variants of this gene that are contributing to
01:59:13.500 human obesity, not of the severity, certainly, of the OB or the monocortin-4 receptor.
01:59:21.480 There are various schools of thought about how this gene is doing it. The interesting thing is
01:59:26.480 that the variation in the gene that is conferring the risk of obesity is variation in what we call
01:59:34.260 non-coding part of the genome. So as people will know, a small fraction of the genome,
01:59:41.020 2% or 3% actually encodes the proteins that are made that we've been talking about, actually.
01:59:48.620 The rest of it is regulatory parts and elements that we don't understand very well.
01:59:54.340 The variants that are implicated for the FTO gene actually occur in the non-coding region.
02:00:00.880 We know exactly where they are. It's not a mystery where they are, but they're in non-coding. They're in
02:00:07.180 the first intron, so to speak, of this gene. The mechanism by which this very, very common variant
02:00:14.820 leads to subtle increases in body fatness in a large number of individuals. To me, this is a very
02:00:23.700 intriguing question. There are some that view the effect as being conveyed through what's called
02:00:30.800 browning of adipose tissue, increasing the energy expenditure of adipose tissue. There are others
02:00:37.220 like myself who think it's affecting central nervous system circuits that affect food intake,
02:00:43.680 but the mechanism, at least in terms of the central nervous system, is really unknown. The primary
02:00:50.780 phenotype that's seen in these individuals who do or don't have what we call the risk variance is food
02:00:57.300 intake. I mean, if you measure their food intake very carefully in a lab, you can see that the
02:01:02.820 individuals with the variants will eat slightly more. They actually may have a slight preference
02:01:08.080 for fattier, higher fat foods than individuals who don't, but what exactly is going on in the central
02:01:16.320 nervous system is not clear. They have actually, in one study, pretty characteristic functional magnetic
02:01:24.100 resonance imaging differences among individuals who do or don't have this variant, but the mechanism
02:01:31.540 is unknown. And this is something which has intrigued me now for eight or ten years. That's the experiment I
02:01:38.740 would love to do. I mean, we're actually trying to do it. Tell me specifically what the actual
02:01:42.700 experiment is, but before you do that, I want to make sure I'm, and this is going to be an oversimplified
02:01:47.400 analogy, but what you're basically saying is there's a genetic marker effectively that creates or
02:01:53.820 identifies those who are predisposed in a high nutrient environment to overeat. So even though our
02:02:01.240 ancestors would have had these genes, the reason, or nevermind our ancestors, even though a hundred years
02:02:06.220 ago or 50 years ago, this gene still existed, probably at the same prevalence, you didn't have the food
02:02:11.660 environment to pour fuel on that fire. Now, just to push back a little bit, isn't that sort of like
02:02:18.180 saying, we've got all these people getting lung cancer. It only started when they started smoking
02:02:23.560 and, you know, only one in 10 of these smokers are getting lung cancer. There's a gene that might be
02:02:29.160 predisposing them to lung cancer. So you're, you're basically saying, I want to look at the problem of
02:02:34.680 why are certain people susceptible to an environmental trigger versus what's the environmental trigger?
02:02:41.620 In the case of smoking, it was so obvious. It was the goddamn cigarettes. In the case of obesity,
02:02:46.820 it's a little more complicated.
02:02:48.100 Correct.
02:02:48.580 So what's the experiment you would do?
02:02:50.520 So the experiment that I would do, and actually we're trying to do these now, is to actually look
02:02:57.160 in animals in whom the variants of the genes that we think are affected by this, because even though
02:03:06.680 the intronic region is not encoding anything, we think it's affecting genes that do encode something.
02:03:14.040 And we think we know at least what one of those genes is. And what I would like to see is what the
02:03:19.540 consequences of these variants are on the functional activity of the system that we think is mediating the
02:03:30.700 effects of these genes. Because I, again, for reasons that are quite technical, I think that one of the
02:03:38.620 major impacts of this gene or these variants in this gene is actually on the structure of the nervous
02:03:46.540 system. So I think their impact is occurring early in the development of the brain. And that what it's
02:03:54.540 doing is changing the circuitry slightly in a very maybe subtle way, probably subtle way, that favors
02:04:02.860 the increased food intake that you just described. And the implication of this is very relevant to some
02:04:13.640 of the things we were just talking about earlier. That is, can the environment impose permanent
02:04:20.680 signatures on the feeding circuits on the feeding circuits, so to speak. And this is, I think, a prime
02:04:27.120 candidate in that regard. And the virtue of the FTO study that we've been talking about is that we know
02:04:34.680 at least enough about the genetics and some of the mechanisms that we can design the experiments primarily,
02:04:43.560 but not totally, but not totally in mice to be able to look precisely at where the changes are occurring.
02:04:51.480 We now just coming online are the tools to look at the circuits as they are acting physiologically. We can
02:04:59.800 activate these circuits in the brain of an animal by using various neurophysiological and neurogenetic
02:05:07.720 techniques that will, I think, permit us to see where the structural consequences of these variants
02:05:15.400 reside. And my guess is that that would give us an insight into the sort of prevalent genetic
02:05:25.160 susceptibility or one of the prevalent genetic susceptibility.
02:05:27.560 What would we do with that information? Let's assume you had all of that information. How does that
02:05:32.440 take obesity from 35% to 5%? Well, you're asking somebody who is not
02:05:38.760 an epidemiologist. And I, you know, some of us do what we know how to do.
02:05:43.320 You're a hammer, you look for a nail.
02:05:45.000 You're a hammer, you look for a nail. So I'm a hammer looking for the nail of whether or not
02:05:49.560 I can show a gene which alters the structure of the central nervous system in a developing organism
02:05:58.120 in such a way as to make it susceptible to the environment. The animals that we have studied
02:06:03.960 where we've manipulated this gene definitely are sensitive to the environment in the sense that they
02:06:12.280 will choose or eat more of a high-fat diet than a normal or, you know, a regular diet.
02:06:19.000 How many such SNPs are there in humans?
02:06:21.400 There are at least a half a dozen SNPs in the first intron.
02:06:26.760 In the first intron alone.
02:06:28.040 And, but that's where they are.
02:06:29.400 That's where they all are.
02:06:30.120 That's where they all are.
02:06:31.000 And what is the prevalence in, to the best of our knowledge,
02:06:35.320 of people today who have at least one of these SNPs in that first intron?
02:06:40.520 60%.
02:06:42.280 So 60% of the population would be at least somewhat susceptible to obesity.
02:06:47.960 Yeah. Which is, you know, sort of fits with what we see because the effect size of this genetic
02:06:55.000 variation is not on or off. It just widens, I think, the, or increases the susceptibility
02:07:03.080 to whatever it is in the environment that's doing this.
02:07:05.800 Are there pharmacologic things that could be done to combat this?
02:07:09.240 Well, we don't know what it is, so we don't know.
02:07:11.320 Because we don't know what the, we don't know what the approach,
02:07:13.000 it's so much more complicated because it's non-coding.
02:07:15.080 Correct. But that's what fascinates me about it. And I think it's producing
02:07:19.880 something in the central nervous system which is structural in consequence, at least in part.
02:07:25.000 And that's why I'm fascinated by it. Because what this means is that if you have this
02:07:30.600 predisposition, it may change the nature of your central nervous system structurally in such a way
02:07:37.640 as to make you either more or less.
02:07:39.560 So if you take just hypothetically an animal that's born with these introns,
02:07:44.760 with this pattern of introns, and you could magically use CRISPR and you could delete them
02:07:49.320 and edit them and make them a wild type again, do you fix the phenotype? Because if not, that would
02:07:55.160 certainly point to something early on in neurologic development, right?
02:07:59.800 Yes, you do. So we can do that kind of thing.
02:08:02.760 You've done that experiment?
02:08:03.640 Yeah. And we've also done experiment.
02:08:06.040 And sorry, it did or did not fix the phenotype?
02:08:07.960 It fixes it.
02:08:08.680 Okay, so that means that it has an influence that transcends development, right?
02:08:13.320 That it's part of development. I mean, because the fix occurs at the level of the fertilization of the...
02:08:20.600 Oh, no, you've never fixed it post.
02:08:23.320 Not fixed it post.
02:08:24.600 Okay, okay.
02:08:25.080 Right. So, Rudy, you're never going to stop working, are you?
02:08:28.120 All right. Well, if I got to figure this out, I'll have to stay at it for a little bit longer.
02:08:32.760 There are a lot of other things I want to talk with you about. Maybe we'll just spend a couple
02:08:36.040 minutes. There's something else I want to talk about, which is the most complicated topic ever,
02:08:41.720 insulin resistance. What the hell does insulin resistance mean? How can an insulin resistant
02:08:48.280 person be fat when, by definition, insulin needs to tell the adipocyte to take up the free fatty
02:08:55.320 acid as triglyceride? So does insulin resistance mean insulin resistance of the muscle, insulin
02:09:01.960 resistance of the liver, but insulin sensitivity of the adipocyte? What does that mean?
02:09:07.320 The metabolic disposition of glucose, for example, is obviously, or maybe not so obviously,
02:09:15.080 it's not primarily via adipose tissue. I mean, glucose, when it gets into the circulation and is
02:09:21.240 removed or taken up. It's mostly in the muscle. Yes. It's mostly in the muscle. So, to the extent
02:09:27.560 that insulin resistance is functionally denominated by elevated blood glucose.
02:09:36.120 It would seem to be the muscle is the primary defect. It would seem to be the muscle, which is the
02:09:40.520 primary defect. Now, the mechanism of the insulin resistance of muscle, I mean, this is an area that
02:09:48.280 is not one that I work in primarily, but there appears to be that what's going on at the sort of
02:09:57.080 distal end of the insulin resistance path is that the glucose transporters are not
02:10:04.280 getting to the surface. They're not responding to insulin the way that they do in a non-insulin
02:10:13.320 resistant person. And when the insulin transporters, the glucose transporters don't get to the muscle,
02:10:20.680 get to the surface of the muscle cell, they can't transport glucose. So at a molecular level,
02:10:26.600 depending on exactly whose model of this you look at, there's something wrong with the transmission of
02:10:33.160 the signal from the insulin receptor. Into the cell to send the glute transporter up.
02:10:38.680 Right. And exactly what that defect is, again, depends on who you talk to or what mechanism is
02:10:47.880 invoked. That appears to be, at least on one level, the sort of primary problem.
02:10:52.680 So what's happening in the liver? When we do an oral glucose tolerance test,
02:10:56.760 the reason we do it for such a short period of time, relatively speaking, aside from who wants to
02:11:00.840 keep a patient in the lab forever is, you pretty much eliminate de novo glycogenesis or you eliminate
02:11:06.760 DNL, right? So you're basically looking at uptake by muscle, but there's some being taken up by the
02:11:12.600 liver. And I don't know that I understand fully, aside from capacity, right? The liver has a relatively
02:11:19.240 small capacity for glycogen relative to the muscles. What else determines that partitioning of how much
02:11:25.240 glucose in the bloodstream is going into the muscle versus the liver? And then ultimately,
02:11:30.760 anything that exceeds those capacities will then undergo DNL and the de novo glycogenic pathway will,
02:11:36.280 you know, produce addition free fatty acid. And again, what does it mean to be insulin resistant in
02:11:41.400 the liver? So it's interesting. You know, the liver, if you want to look at it this way,
02:11:45.400 there are sort of two major metabolic things going on. There are a lot of things going on in the liver,
02:11:50.040 but as far as what we're talking about, one is the ability to make lipid, to synthesize lipid,
02:11:56.600 and the other is the ability to make or take up glycogen, to release or take up glycogen. They are
02:12:03.640 differentially sensitive to insulin suppression or enhancement, if you want to look at it that way.
02:12:11.640 And what happens, I mean, just again, at a biochemical level is you can get insulin resistant in the liver
02:12:19.080 to the suppression of gluconeogenesis while you maintain sensitivity to the effect of insulin on
02:12:27.240 the lipids.
02:12:27.960 To normal lipogenesis pathway.
02:12:29.400 Yes.
02:12:29.560 That's the worst outcome.
02:12:30.760 Yes. But that's what happens. I mean, that's the state, I think, in many individuals who have
02:12:39.080 issues with regard to insulin homeostasis, if you want to describe it that way.
02:12:43.560 Yeah. So for the listener, what we're basically saying is the doomsday scenario would be
02:12:47.800 your muscles become resistant to the signaling of insulin and they don't put these glute transporters
02:12:53.240 up there and you don't bring glucose into your muscle.
02:12:55.240 Yeah. But why that happens actually, in other words, what is it about becoming obese that is
02:13:01.720 actually doing something to skeletal muscle?
02:13:06.200 What if it's the reverse?
02:13:07.240 Well, it may be. I mean, again, this is an area of somewhat hot debate, but one possibility,
02:13:13.320 I guess, is that there's something that happens to adipose tissue when you store
02:13:19.160 whatever for that individual is an excess amount of lipid that's producing another molecule or some
02:13:26.600 other mechanism by which muscle is affected with regard to its insulin sensitivity.
02:13:33.960 The other possibility, which I think, again, many people think is at least partly relevant,
02:13:39.720 is that when you increase the amount of lipid in your adipose tissue, you also increase the amount
02:13:46.440 of lipid in your muscle, the fat that's in your muscle, actually, the marbling of your own muscle,
02:13:53.240 and that that itself has an effect on glucose homeostasis. So there's a whole...
02:14:00.520 What does Gerald Schumann think of this? Doesn't he have an idea that it starts in the liver?
02:14:05.400 Isn't that his view?
02:14:07.640 So Gerald Schumann has done a lot of work on the mechanism by which insulin affects
02:14:15.400 glucose transport in muscle. I don't want to speak for him, I mean, in terms of what he
02:14:20.440 thinks about this, but he certainly is one of the people who I think has advanced the
02:14:26.600 field in terms of understanding why, for example, ambient fatty acids seems to suppress
02:14:34.200 glucose uptake in muscle. This was originally described by Randall.
02:14:38.440 And just to be clear, that's not Randall the patient.
02:14:40.920 That's correct. Not that Randall.
02:14:42.280 You didn't know shit about.
02:14:43.320 Right. It's spelled differently also.
02:14:46.040 So I think what Gerald Schulman has done is to advance our understanding of
02:14:50.280 a very, I think, compelling mechanism by which high levels of ambient fatty acid themselves
02:14:55.640 might suppress insulin signaling. Some of that fatty acid could, in fact, come from
02:15:02.440 lipid that's stored in the muscle as opposed to lipid or fatty acids that are in the circulation.
02:15:08.040 But there are these two different phenotypes, right? When you look at Cahill's 40-day fasted
02:15:12.760 subjects, their free fatty acids were through the roof. Their insulin was very low. Their glucose
02:15:17.880 was very low. Their ketones were very high. It's interesting to know, would you call them
02:15:22.440 insulin-sensitive or insulin-resistant, right? Because probably if you challenge them with
02:15:27.080 glucose immediately, they would have hyperglycemia. Physiologically, their muscles probably would,
02:15:32.280 in the short moment, say, hey, I don't want this stuff. Save every gram of that for the brain.
02:15:38.520 But presumably, if you refed them carbs for three days, they'd probably be as insulin-sensitive as
02:15:42.920 they'd ever been. Right. So I mean, this is one of the reasons why I think you're right. But I think
02:15:49.000 maybe what Shulman or Randall would say is that the reason for the lack of response to the transport
02:15:56.920 of glucose is that the system has now been downset by virtue of the high ambient free fatty acids,
02:16:03.560 and it may take some time to... Interesting. So you're thinking that could be the
02:16:07.320 short-term signal. Correct. And that takes time. That's why, again, I don't do this for a living.
02:16:12.600 I mean, you would know this. But why people are encouraged not to restrict their carbohydrates
02:16:18.600 prior to having a glucose tolerance test, for example. Right.
02:16:22.040 Because you can manipulate the system in the way that you just mentioned.
02:16:26.440 Rudy, I could sit here and talk about this stuff all night long, but
02:16:29.560 your wife will probably be pissed off that I kept you here all night. So maybe not. Maybe she's 0.99
02:16:34.120 actually enjoying the fact that you're right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This has been super interesting.
02:16:39.000 You're really one of the most thoughtful people I've ever spoken to on this topic. And I think
02:16:43.640 there are a lot of areas where we don't necessarily see eye to eye clinically, which again, that sounds
02:16:48.520 like a much more harsh statement than it is. I just think we look at the world a little differently on
02:16:52.360 some level, but... Yeah, I'm a hammer.
02:16:54.120 You're a hammer looking for a nail, and I'm kind of a general contractor looking for everything in sight.
02:16:59.640 I mean, I think it's interesting. I think your FTO example is a great example. I mean,
02:17:03.800 if I were tackling this problem, and I'm glad I'm not, I'd be wanting to understand the
02:17:08.600 environmental trigger. Is it the cigarette that's causing lung cancer? You're trying to solve a
02:17:13.160 different problem, which is, why is it that only some people get lung cancer when they smoke?
02:17:18.520 And those people, before the adage of the invention of cigarettes, would have never got lung cancer.
02:17:23.720 But now that these cigarettes are here, probably can't do much about it. Let's figure out who they are.
02:17:28.200 And not just for that reason. I mean, just as an intellectual question, I find it very intriguing.
02:17:34.760 But knowledge of whatever would lead a person who smokes not to get lung cancer,
02:17:41.640 it would be very nice to know what that is, that whatever that biology is, for many,
02:17:47.240 many reasons, not just related necessarily to lung cancer. And I see the issue of the
02:17:53.880 consequences of a genetic variant, very prevalent in the population, which predisposes some individuals
02:18:00.520 to the environmental consequences and others not. If we knew what that mechanism is,
02:18:05.640 is there's no reason to believe that at some point we might not be able to manipulate it,
02:18:10.920 not only in service of those who have the genetic variant, but others who might benefit from
02:18:17.720 knowledge of the circuitry.
02:18:19.480 Yeah. I mean, that makes a lot of sense. And you've given me some great pearls over the years.
02:18:25.160 I remember you, I think it was one night at dinner when you, me, Mike Rosenbaum were playing patty
02:18:31.880 cakes and it somehow came up that in your 10 to 20% weight reduced subjects,
02:18:37.080 a little bit of T3 could overcome some of the deficit. And I remember having this eureka moment
02:18:42.120 because I was like, wait a minute, all these patients I see that lose weight have a reverse
02:18:46.360 T3 spike. That would exactly explain why giving them T3 rather than T4 would address the problem.
02:18:53.480 You give a patient with high reverse T3, T4, you're just, you're making them worse,
02:18:58.040 but you give them T3, you can bypass it. So I'm incredibly grateful to you,
02:19:03.240 to your work and for your friendship. So thank you very much. Thank you.
02:19:09.560 You can find all of this information and more at peteratiamd.com forward slash podcast.
02:19:14.680 There you'll find the show notes, readings and links related to this episode.
02:19:18.840 You can also find my blog and the nerd safari at peteratiamd.com. What's a nerd safari you ask?
02:19:24.920 Just click on the link at the top of the site to learn more. Maybe the simplest thing to do is to
02:19:29.000 sign up for my subjectively non-lame once a week email, where I'll update you on what I've been up
02:19:33.640 to, the most interesting papers I've read and all things related to longevity, science, performance,
02:19:38.920 sleep, et cetera. On social, you can find me on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook, all with the ID,
02:19:44.440 peteratiamd. But usually Twitter is the best way to reach me to share your questions and comments.
02:19:49.640 Now for the obligatory disclaimer, this podcast is for general informational purposes only and does
02:19:54.120 not constitute the practice of medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare services,
02:19:59.000 including the giving of medical advice. And note, no doctor patient relationship is formed.
02:20:04.520 The use of this information and the materials linked to the podcast is at the user's own risk.
02:20:09.320 The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice,
02:20:13.880 diagnoses, or treatment. Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice for any medical
02:20:19.400 condition they have and should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such
02:20:23.960 conditions. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I take conflicts of interest very seriously. For all
02:20:29.800 of my disclosures, the companies I invest in and or advise, please visit peteratiamd.com forward slash about.