Lion of the Blogosphere

HBD in the news

Paul Fussell observed back in the 1980s that proles are fat.

Now, reported at the Daily Mail, researchers have biological evidence of what might be the prole brain.

The research involved sophisticated brain images of 32 adults recruited from the city of Baltimore in Maryland, 16 men and 16 women. Anyone who had a history of brain damage, substance abuse or mental illness was excluded from the group.

Outlining the object of the study, the authors said: ‘It has been suggested that body composition itself might somehow affect the neural systems that underlie cognition, motivation, self-control and salience processing, which would in turn affect one’s ability to make better lifestyle choices, forgoing immediate and/or highly salient rewards for the sake of longer-term health and wellness goals’.

The researchers measured Body Mass Index, a commonly measure of how overweight a person is, and body fat percentages and compared them to differences in brain structure and function.

Lead researcher Chase Figley, an assistant professor in the department of radiology at the University of Manitoba, said that the brain scans were very thorough.

He said they covered changes across the whole brain but also ‘specific networks’.

In particular he was interested in the ‘salience network’, which he described as the ‘seat of motivation, willpower, and the ability to persevere through physical and emotional challenges’.

The results showed that there was ‘no significant difference’ in terms of white matter between people who had a normal weight and people who were fat.

Researchers said that their findings could explain why overweight people make poor diet choices – they do not have the mental capacity to control themselves

Researchers said that their findings could explain why overweight people make poor diet choices – they do not have the mental capacity to control themselves.

In a surprise twist, people with a higher BMI actually had slightly more grey matter overall.

However looking at specific networks on the brain a different picture began to emerge.

In particular, heavier and fatter people had less white matter in the salience network.

There were also differences in the dorsal striatum, an area of the brain involved with habitual behaviour.

Professor Figley told the National Post, a Canadian newspaper: ‘It stands to reason that these changes could further affect the ability of overweight individuals to exert self-control and maintain healthy lifestyle choices’.

He added that it was not clear if the brain differences predispose certain individuals to becoming fat, or vice versa.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 14, 2016 at 12:33 am

Posted in Biology

33 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. This is a pretty recent phenomenon though, no? I don’t think proles became fat until the middle of the 20th century after WWII. Proles were skinny before then.


    July 14, 2016 at 1:24 am

    • Proles were skinny before then.

      True. The earlier stereotype is the fat rich man or the “fat cats” with any kind of power.

      The proles, the poor, the farmer, factory worker was a wiry, shriveled up guy or woman who had been “worked to the bone”.


      July 14, 2016 at 3:32 pm

    • Check out these NYC street scenes from Ann Althouse’s son’s page:

      This is Manhattan, center of the US urban elite and with the exception of maybe 3 men and 3 women nearly everyone else is terribly dressed, tattooed, poorly built and kinda or very ugly.

      I hate to go all JS but……..prole prole prole. Fat or not.


      July 14, 2016 at 4:10 pm

  2. The fatter you get, the dumber you get. The dumber you get, the fatter you get. Do all you can to avoid getting dumber and fatter. Once you reach a certain point of dumbness or fatness, it becomes very difficult to return to the point of equilibrium on the fat/dumber scale.


    July 14, 2016 at 2:23 am

  3. What part of the brain makes a person want to self mutilate, i.e. get breast reduction surgery? See below before and after shots of Shoshana Lonstein.


    July 14, 2016 at 2:44 am

    • Huge breasts give a lot of women back problems, breathing problems, and make it difficult for them to do physical activity.


      July 14, 2016 at 9:03 am

    • She was probably started to have serious back issues with boobs that big, plus after having 3 kids they were sagging an huge and possibly deformed amount.


      July 14, 2016 at 10:23 am

    • She saved herself some back trouble. Anyway, she looks like the stereotypical Long Island Jewish girl. One that Jerry couldn’t get back in HS.


      July 14, 2016 at 10:33 am

    • my older brother went to college with her when she started dating jerry seinfeld. he doesn’t have any good stories.

      his other class mates at george washington university included huma abedin, and kerry washington was in his social circle.


      July 14, 2016 at 10:46 am

    • First of all big breasts are often unattractive in the nude and the older a women gets the more this is the case. This is the reason that almost never gets cited by women but that I suspect is actually the most important. And then the more common justifications are health (especially back) problems and unwanted male attention.


      July 14, 2016 at 11:22 am

    • I’m shocked Curle’s post about this rather unattractive Yenta, gets a chain of replies. There’s something rancid about this woman and her types, that now many Jewish men try to avoid.


      July 14, 2016 at 11:45 am

      • Is she a yenta, or a JAP?


        July 14, 2016 at 12:52 pm

      • Yenta is a generic term for a Jewish woman.


        July 14, 2016 at 1:58 pm

      • No, a yenta is a woman who is a gossip or busybody. That’s how my Jewish mother uses the term.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        July 14, 2016 at 2:00 pm

      • 99% of Jewish women fit the Yenta stereotype. You could also include many Shiksas with the same petty attitude.


        July 14, 2016 at 2:06 pm

      • No, that 99% number is totally untrue.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        July 14, 2016 at 2:10 pm

      • Growing up in NYC, and being surrounded with many of them, I can only count the number of Jewish women with 1 hand, who remotely came across as affable. Guidettes on the other hand, even the prolier ones, who exhibit the same type of excitability, don’t exhibit the type of repugnant behaviors that one finds with Jewish women.


        July 14, 2016 at 2:41 pm

      • I’ve heard that there’s a stereotype that Jewish girls have big jugs. Is this true?


        July 14, 2016 at 9:20 pm

      • Yes, it’s true that the stereotype is out there.

      • “Guidettes on the other hand, even the prolier ones, who exhibit the same type of excitability, don’t exhibit the type of repugnant behaviors that one finds with Jewish women.”

        Wow. JS saying something nice about guidettes?

        But what “repugnant” behavior are you speaking of? Is this only Jewish women but not Jewish men? I find that there is a repugnant type in every ethnic group.


        July 14, 2016 at 11:44 pm

      • Is the stereotype itself true?

        What’s the backstory on the stereotype?


        July 14, 2016 at 11:53 pm

  4. Black women really take the cake in this regard. A staggering 57% of black women are clinically obese; 82% are either obese or overweight (2011 data). You might think that would damage their self-image, but blacks consistently measure well above whites in self-esteem.

    Mark Caplan

    July 14, 2016 at 6:21 am

    • Many black men (as well as Central Americans and Arabs) find obese women to be appealing.

      Lewis Medlock

      July 14, 2016 at 12:03 pm

  5. ” ‘no significant different’ … ‘less’ ” …? And what does “white matter” do anyway? Don’t most of us assume by now that all behavioral differences correlate with/to(?) neurological differences? Also, BMI is a misleading indicator, as I think you’ve mentioned before. 50% of male Bay Ridgers “work out” with weights, and at least 10% seem to me to be on steroids. Plus, Mexicans have turtle-shaped bodies, and are naturally going to have a high BMI. Moreover, fatness correlates with/to strength even without weight-training. Why do researchers say “Americans are fat” rather than “Americans are strong”? Given that half of American heaviness is weight-training-produced hyper-muscularity they should say “Americans are VERY strong.”


    July 14, 2016 at 6:46 am

  6. Addendum — but prole weight-trainers are certainly fatter than bourgeois ones. The difference is so obvious at Harbor Fitness that it’s as though two different subspecies of Homo Sapiens “work out” there. Another interesting thing is that the proles tend to do lots of body-building exercises (supplementary stuff such as inclined presses and pulley-swooshes, plus half-benchpresses and half-squats) even though they’re fat, while the bourgeois guys tend to be powerlifters; they’ll bring the bar down to their chests and try to do full squats, and they deadlift. So you get the paradox of fat prole bodybuilders and thin bourgeois powerlifters. (Serious powerlifters and strongmen are obsessive nerds.) Oh, and another thing — the proles with their pretty tattooes and neon tights and muscle-shirts are weirdly feminine, while the bourgeois guys are masculine in the manner of dour Puritan farmers.


    July 14, 2016 at 6:58 am

  7. So this study was conducted in the city of Baltimore, which indicates that blacks could have been used as subjects in the test. In fact, I would say that the findings indicate the brains being researched, are those of a specific demographic predisposed to a lower future time orientation, namely the brains of black folks.


    July 14, 2016 at 9:12 am

    • Johns Hopkins University is in Baltimore, and they had access to the population of the greater Baltimore area which is predominately blue-collar white.

  8. “The research involved sophisticated brain images of 32 adults recruited from the city of Baltimore in Maryland, 16 men and 16 women. Anyone who had a history of brain damage, substance abuse or mental illness was excluded from the group.”


    July 14, 2016 at 10:38 am

  9. Brain scans are useless, pseudoscientific, modern-day phrenology. That said, duh, of course people with poor impulse control will chub up because: carbs are cheap, immediately gratifying, and improve mood (or reduce feelings of depression). The consequences of excessive carbage, like obesity and diabetes, are back and joint pain and lethargy, but that’s too far into the future for dumbasses.


    July 14, 2016 at 2:13 pm

    • “duh, of course people with poor impulse control will chub up because”

      This is not a “duh” at all and in fact I disagree with a lot of it. Most people who are thin are thin because they were born with thin genes and not because they use impulse control to avoid eating too much.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      July 14, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      • Probably thin genes are distributed uniformly across class because the obesity epidemic only started in earnest in the 80s; too short a time frame for genetic reshuffling ( although it’s in th process of doing just that).
        So why does obesity correlate with class and geographic area? The genetically vulnerable burgeois are more mindful of stigma and will do whatever it takes to stay leaner, not always successfully, but will avoid the Walmart land whale look at least. And better quality food is more available to them.
        The proles are not so subject to negative peer pressure and are constrained by income to get the most bang for the buck from cheap carbs. Their vulnerable sector almost always chub up, even if the ones with good genes stay thinner no matter how bad their diets.
        Interestingly, there’s a study showing that people living at higher altitues- Co., Wy.tend to be thinner all other things being equal, unlike their sea level cousins.


        July 14, 2016 at 5:52 pm

  10. I think success in life is most connected with a person’s willpower (self-regulation) and ability to avoid instant gratification and thus addictions. The more you succumb, the weaker and stupider you get. Focus and restraint is more powerful than innate intelligence.

    This is based on the work of Roy Baumeister who “inquired about the reasons for self-defeating behavior. His conclusions: there is no self-defeating urge as some have thought. Rather, self-defeating behavior is either a result of trade-offs (enjoying drugs now at the expense of the future), backfiring strategies (eating a snack to reduce stress only to feel more stressed), or the psychological strategy to escape the self – where various self-defeating strategies are rather directed to relieve the burden of selfhood.”


    July 14, 2016 at 4:13 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: