November 28, 2010
What is the difference between set points and settling points in relation to weight control? The difference is that set points is when hunger and eating are started from falling below one’s set point or as the text describes it “prescribed optimal level”, Pinel, (2007).The theories of set point suggest that one’s weight should remain constant. However, many people’s weights various are weight numbers and fluctuate over time.
Whereas, in settling points, it has to do with body, weight drifting around a natural settling point to which certain “factors that have influence eating achieve equilibrium” Pinel, (2007). So if one’s body weight fluctuates then it can be maintained, or be corrected to come back down to the maintained weight number whereas, if it were at a set point it cannot. It would therefore have to remain at that one weight staying up never to go down.
If I were to go with one or the other of the two I would have to go with the settling point because I have had fluctuated weight my whole life and I have gain a good amount of weight as well as lost the whole amount to half. Therefore, I disagree with the set point for one’s weight does not necessarily have to stay up and never be able to come down. It depends on the people themselves whether or not they want that number down or up. Not all people’s body weights are the same nor do they stay the same for experiences, traumas, or lifestyles, so weight fluctuate very much occasionally in humans that having only a set point would make more for obese people than not, and they to fluctuate within their body weight to.
Pinel, J., J. (2007). Basics of Biopsychology. Retrieved from, Axia College.