Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggergirl9
As an overweight adopted child of obese adoptive parents, I can say for sure nurturing played a bigger role than genetics
I'm also adopted - and I could just as reasonably support the opposite conclusion - that genetics for sure played a larger role than upbringing.
While my father is thin, my mother is obese (gaining her weight in her mid twenties). I am the only person in the family to have been obese as a child. None of my siblings, parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousings, great aunts or great uncles had a childhood weight problem. My two sisters (who are my parents biological children) follow the pattern of our parents. One gained weight in her late 20's (just like Mom - even in the same place as Mom - all butt and thigh - though my sister has never been obese, she struggles very hard to maintain a healthy weight). My other sister has always been thin, and even after her pregnancies lost the pregnancy weight quickly (if she continues to take after Dad's pattern, she'll have to be careful once she reaches retirement age). My brother (also adopted) has an even different weight history (one that didn't follow the pattern of anyone related to our parents by birth). He was VERY thin, even to the point of being underweight into his late 20's. Even putting on muscle was hard for him until he started Navy Seal training. Only after retiring has he gained any "fat" (and only mild lovehandles).
So which is truly more important? I think you can't determine that. Both genetics and environment are important - and the degree may vary tremendously from one person to the next. However we can't do much about our genetic code - so we're only left with behavior and environment.
It's like a genetic predisposition to anything. It doesn't mean that behavior isn't vital (in fact the reverse is true). If skin cancer runs in your family, it's really not smart to spend much time sunbathing without sunscreen because "what's the use, I'm likely to get skin cancer anyway.".