The Skinny on Fat: You're Not Always What You Eat

New study may help answer why people on the same diet have different girths

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Ever wondered why some people seem able to gobble down anything and still stay slim?

New research shows that the answer may lie in serotonin, a neurotransmitter, or chemical messenger produced by nerve cells. Scientists at the University of California, San Francisco, (U.C.S.F.) report in the journal Cell Metabolism that the nerve messenger, a known appetite suppressant, not only controls whether and how much you eat but, independent of that, also plays a role in what the body does with the calories once they're consumed.

"This may mean you could develop therapeutic strategies to manipulate fat metabolism (the rate at which food is turned into energy) independently of what you eat," says study co-author Kaveh Ashrafi, a U.C.S.F. physiologist.

Many weight-loss drugs now on the market are designed to increase serotonin levels, but they were believed to work by stemming appetite; the new research shows they may also work by speeding metabolism. That means, Ashrafi says, that treatments could be developed that target obesity, which has been linked to a slew of ills from diabetes to cancer, without necessarily suppressing appetite.

Ashrafi says he launched the study to determine why some people on diet drugs regained their weight after they stopped popping them, even if they did not increase their caloric intake.

"The assumption that body weight is simply a consequence of behavior is not exactly correct," he says. "It is the combination of behavior and the organism's propensity for what to do with nutrients it takes in," whether to store or use them.

Ashrafi, postdoc Supriya Srinivasan and their colleagues conducted their research on roundworms (Caenorhabditis elegans), which are genetically similar to mammals; all the fundamental mechanisms at work in the organism are also found in humans. The team created a number of mutant worms with engineered defects in proteins that serotonin controls; some of the proteins they tampered with affected appetite, others metabolism.

The researchers found that worms would alter their eating habits—although their fat content did not change—if they blocked proteins linked to appetite; if they disrupted proteins involved with metabolism, the worms would slim down even if they continued to down the same amount of food.

"We are not saying that feeding is not important for fat," Ashrafi warns. "What we've discovered here in the worm, at a molecular level, is the mechanisms that allow serotonin to have its appetite effect are different from those that control metabolism." He says this may explain why two individuals with similar eating and physical activity habits may have very different body weights—because their bodies process the food differently.

Ashrafi expects the findings to translate to humans. He says, however, that there is still much to learn about how the body regulates fat content. "The goal of this is not to say that here is a pill that will make people thin regardless of what they eat," he notes. "There is nothing in our study that argues against good nutrition and physical activity."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe