Why is obesity science so hard to control?
Post-genomic optimism about fine-grained control meets obesity as a multi-level system: intervention, integration and translation cannot be pulled apart.
Source
Intervention, integration and translation in obesity research: Genetic, developmental and metaorganismal approaches
What they did
The authors treat prediction and control as driving aims of the life sciences, then follow genetic, developmental/epigenetic (pregnancy and early childhood) and metaorganismal/microbiome approaches to weight, arguing those features are inseparable in actual research.
What they found
To intervene successfully you need integrated, multi-level, translatable understanding. The microbiome is the collective genome of resident microbes. Developmental explanations did not come out of nowhere in the mid-1990s; they reconfigured the field.
The limits
What it doesn't show
This is philosophy of ongoing science, not a diet trial. It does not pick a winning obesity theory.
Key terms
- Intervention
- The control-oriented aim of acting on weight gain, loss and maintenance.
- Integration
- Multi-level understanding without which intervention in complex systems fails.
- Translation
- Moving results across experimental and human contexts; inseparable from intervening.
- Metaorganism / microbiome
- The host plus its microbial community and that community’s collective genome.
Flashcards
Research intelligence for this paper
See its role on concept claims, tensions it is part of, placement history, and related discoveries.
Quiz yourself
Life sciences here aim at?
Common questions
What drives the life sciences here?
Prediction and control of biological systems, with post-genomic optimism about fine-grained control.
Can you intervene without integrating?
No. The features are inseparable in ongoing research.
Third avenue?
Metaorganismal/microbiome approaches, after genes and development.
More on Philosophy of science