Monday, June 28, 2010

Brain versus gut: Our inborn food fight

The relatively larger human brain makes us the most intelligent of the primates. But if we’re so smart, how come we’ve eaten our way into an obesity epidemic?

One reason is the relatively smaller human stomach and shorter large intestines, says Emory anthropologist George Armelagos.

“Our evolutionary history has given us a brain that is focused much of the time on eating, and a gut that isn’t designed for today’s variety and volume of high-density food,” explains Armelagos, a bioarcheologist and an expert in prehistoric diets.

Armelagos recently wrote a review of research on evolution and the human diet, published in the Journal of Anthropological Research.

Journalist Michael Pollan popularized the concept of “the omnivore’s dilemma,” the desire for dietary variety paired with the perilous search for new foods, in his best-selling book by the same name. Pollan primarily covered how today’s abundance of food is fueling a national eating disorder.

Armelagos focuses on the prehistoric perspective. “Our current pattern of eating reflects the way in which Homo sapiens evolved and resolved the omnivore’s dilemma,” he says. “Our cravings for certain foods don’t go back just a few years, or even 10,000 years, but more than a million years."

For thousands of millennia, our ancestors subsisted as foragers, hunting and gathering in marginal environments. The expansion of the brain’s neocortex in early humans facilitated social cognition and memory, supporting the task of finding edible plants and prey amid the vagaries of an unpredictable climate.

Larger brains, however, increased caloric demands: The human brain, which represents only 2 percent of our body mass, consumes 20 percent of our energy. Around two million years ago, Armelagos says, our early ancestors began evolving a smaller total gut size, relative to other primates.

“The expensive-tissue hypothesis argues that our big brains are fueled by the energy saved by our having a smaller stomach and shorter large intestines,” he says. “Whatever the reasons for the changes in the alimentary canal, there is no question that they necessitated diets of high-quality, high-density foods.”

Fast-forward through millennia to the development of agriculture, cooking, the industrialization of food, and finally the advent of McDonalds. Today we’re faced with a perfect storm that’s capsizing the nutritional benefits of our adapted biology, Armelagos says.

“If you study our primitive pasts, the biological underpinnings of today’s obesity epidemic become clear,” Armelagos says. “But a solution to this complex bio-cultural problem is not so clear.”

Related:
Getting skeletons to talk
Evolutionary eating
Putting teeth into the Barker Hypothesis

Friday, June 25, 2010

Is that latte worth $4? You better believe it.

By Carol Clark

For years, I’ve stayed loyal to my cell phone: a basic candy bar model. Cheap. Great reception. Easy. Which explains why I was naïve enough to think I could go to the Apple store yesterday and pick up an iPhone 4. The hundreds of geeks who brought lawn chairs and books for the line snaking through Lenox Mall made it clear I was a novice at technical self-indulgence. So I went downstairs to Starbucks to console myself with a latte.

I checked my email and saw this article from U.S. News and World Report on 10 things to splurge on this summer (including an iPhone 4 and a trip to Starbucks for the new free wi-fii.) Validation of your purchases, and attempted purchases, is what you need when you’re sipping a $4 coffee.

What really drove it all home for me was the message from an Emory scientist quoted in the U.S. News article. Here's the excerpt:

Gregory Berns, a professor in the psychiatry and behavioral sciences as well as economics at Emory University, found that when people pay more for products that they believe enhance their mental acuity (such as coffee or energy drinks), then they are more likely to work. Berns identifies this as a "placebo" effect. Basically, it works because people believe it works. That means if you believe a $4 coffee will help you ace a test or perform well in an interview, then you should spend $4 on that coffee because it probably will help you.

"We have been conditioned to expect that higher prices equates to higher quality," explains Berns. "Therefore with a product like an energy drink, you expect the more expensive it is, the better it works."

But is a $4 coffee really better than a $1 one? It is if you believe it is, says Berns.

Related:
Your money and the herd mentality
Decisions, decisions: The biology behind the choices we make
Fork over your ideas

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

'Hominid' a hit in Holland


Check out this Dutch news report, above, on the recent performances of "Hominid" at Holland's Burger Zoo. Theater Emory commissioned the play, which is based on chimpanzee behaviors observed by Emory psychologist Frans de Waal when he was a young researcher at the zoo. The video report is in Dutch, but the images give an idea of the elaborateness of the large, outdoor staging of the drama for its ongoing European tour.

Related:
The best zoo drama, bar none
Ape murder-suicide inspires human drama

Monday, June 21, 2010

Both oil spill and clean-up pose health risks


Cleaning the Gulf oil mess "is very toxic work," warns Linda McCauley, dean of Emory's school of nursing. In the video above, McCauley discusses some of the human health concerns associated with the ecological disaster, from the physical effects of inhaling chemicals to depression.

You can listen to McCauley discuss more about potential psychological effects of the oil spill on Gulf coast residents in this WABE Atlanta report.

A nationally recognized environmental health researcher, McCauley is among the scientists participating in an Institute of Medicine workshop in New Orleans exploring the potential short- and long-term health impact of the nation's worst oil spill.

In the video below, she explains that the safety of the chemical being sprayed into the ocean to disperse the oil is debatable. "Dispersants help take off oil that's floating in water, but when you emulsify it, it sinks down in the water," McCauley says. "Environmentalists are very concerned about what's happening to the animal and plant life by sinking the oil to the bottom of the ocean."



Related:
The Gulf warrior
Can whales and dolphins adapt to oily Gulf?
Oil spill may reshape environmental law
Gulf oil mess fuels interest in green energy

Friday, June 18, 2010

Computers breathe life into 'Toy Story'


From the zoetrope to the magic lantern and the 1937 Disney classic “Snow White,” animators have always pushed the boundaries of technology and art. For decades, the hand-drawn artistry of Disney Studios dominated animated feature films. But rapid advances in computer-generated imagery, better known as CGI, have revolutionized the field.

The 1995 film "Toy Story" was "a complete game changer,” says Eddy Von Mueller, an Emory lecturer in film studies. “Toy Story 3” opened in theaters today, to rave reviews.

“The Toy Story franchise is fun, because you can look at the three Toy Story films and you can see the evolution of CGI as a cinematic tool," Von Mueller says. “Toy Story proved that we could make animation via computers that audiences would respond to, and because of that the floodgates have opened.”

Disney eventually bought Pixar. “When Disney says we can’t beat them we better join them, it’s an acknowledgment that the world of animation has been overturned,” he says.

Related:
Is 'Iron Man' suited for reality?
'Avatar' theme can make you blue