Anne Hathaway

I think Anne Hathaway is so charming, and I'll always have a soft spot for her because of Princess Diaries. She does not, however, have a particularly awesome body.

dark-knight-rises-anne-hathaway-set-image-04.jpg


I'm so interested to see how she'll look in a few weeks!!! :)
 
Jane said:
Yeah, girl. Blew my mind when I heard it. I like to listen to Howstuffworks.com podcasts while I'm a work. They are still studying epigenetics but basically they have found that although genes themselves take generations to alter, each gene has methyl tags which can be switched on and off according to diet and environmental factors. These "switches" control how a certain gene behaves and can become set and passed down to one's offspring for 3 to 4 generations to increase the chances of survival. For example, many women that were pregnant in NYC when 9/11 happened had babies born with PTSD due to the stressful environment their mothers were in during their time in the womb.

You can read all about it here:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/genetic/epigenetics.htm
Click to expand...

I recall pregnant rats who were fed much more and were 'obese' also had certain methyl tags switched on/off and their offspring were more predisposed to be obese compared to rats who were of a normal weight during pregnancy. Poor Jessica Simpson's baby....
 
Irene said:
I recall pregnant rats who were fed much more and were 'obese' also had certain methyl tags switched on/off and their offspring were more predisposed to be obese compared to rats who were of a normal weight during pregnancy. Poor Jessica Simpson's baby....
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right. The consensus in the field seems to be that in utero exposure to either restricted or excessive caloric intake predisposes you to metabolic syndrome. I recall studies have also correlated body mass at birth in a similar manner (for example low weight premies also have a higher incidence of metabolic syndrome later on in life than babies born in a healthy range).
 
Irene said:
I recall pregnant rats who were fed much more and were 'obese' also had certain methyl tags switched on/off and their offspring were more predisposed to be obese compared to rats who were of a normal weight during pregnancy. Poor Jessica Simpson's baby....
Click to expand...

Absolutely, on the other side of the coin they found that unhealthy fat yellow rats AND healthy weight brown rats that were fed a diet of just plain crap rat food during pregancy had unhealthy fat yellow offspring while fat yellow rats that were fed diets high in B vitamins had certain tags switched on/off and had normal, small, healthy brown offspring so yeah, you would think that women who don't care about their own bodies would at the very least concern themselves with eating healthy during their pregancy to give their babies a better genetic start. Poor diets during pregnancy and even into childhood are related to a whole slew of maladies including ADHD, asthma, allergies, obesity and, of course, early onset diabetes while healthy diets high in the necessary nutrients switch epigenetic tags to fend off all of these maladies as well as cancer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cel said:
Ah ha! Thank you, Jane for reminding about the epigenetics component. Couldn't remember were/why I read that article and now I remember it was for journal club. The article I was referencing is:

Heijmans BT, et al. Persistent epigenetic differences associated with prenatal exposure to famine in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 4;105(44):17046-9.

Essentially, the study used historical data from the Dutch famine of 1994-1945 (strict rations were placed on the Netherlands during the German occupation). The daily rations started at about 1000 cals/day at the being of the occupation and were further restricted to about 500 cals/day closer to the end. The study separated the data into three groups: (1) people born or conceived during the famine (2) same-sex siblings born before or conceived after the famine (3) unrelated individuals - used as controls.

The researches look at the level of methylation of insulin growth factor 2 (IGF-2) (more methylation, less IGF-2), this hormone is important for proper growth and development, in the subjects almost six decades after the Dutch famine. The study found that those conceived during the Dutch hunger winter had less methylation of the IGF-2 gene compared to their unexposed same-sex siblings (ie: those in group 2 above). Those conceived during the famine also had impaired glucose tolerance, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and higher rates of obesity in adulthood. The researchers theorize that these changes occur because the body attempts to be as efficient as possible in storing calories since nutrition/calories were scarce during development.

Sorry, for the essay. Just think it is very interesting, particularly of those who want children in the future. (Plus, I'm a genetics dork :oops:).
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing!
 
georgia88 said:
I think Anne Hathaway is so charming, and I'll always have a soft spot for her because of Princess Diaries. She does not, however, have a particularly awesome body.

dark-knight-rises-anne-hathaway-set-image-04.jpg


I'm so interested to see how she'll look in a few weeks!!! :)
Click to expand...

I don't think most men that Hollywood are targeting would want to see Catwoman look much thinner. Plus, she can't be too thin to look like she can kick ass. I know, I know, I'm playing Devil's Advocate here. :eek:
 
Cel said:
Ah ha! Thank you, Jane for reminding about the epigenetics component. Couldn't remember were/why I read that article and now I remember it was for journal club. The article I was referencing is:

Heijmans BT, et al. Persistent epigenetic differences associated with prenatal exposure to famine in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 4;105(44):17046-9.

Essentially, the study used historical data from the Dutch famine of 1994-1945 (strict rations were placed on the Netherlands during the German occupation). The daily rations started at about 1000 cals/day at the being of the occupation and were further restricted to about 500 cals/day closer to the end. The study separated the data into three groups: (1) people born or conceived during the famine (2) same-sex siblings born before or conceived after the famine (3) unrelated individuals - used as controls.

The researches look at the level of methylation of insulin growth factor 2 (IGF-2) (more methylation, less IGF-2), this hormone is important for proper growth and development, in the subjects almost six decades after the Dutch famine. The study found that those conceived during the Dutch hunger winter had less methylation of the IGF-2 gene compared to their unexposed same-sex siblings (ie: those in group 2 above). Those conceived during the famine also had impaired glucose tolerance, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and higher rates of obesity in adulthood. The researchers theorize that these changes occur because the body attempts to be as efficient as possible in storing calories since nutrition/calories were scarce during development.

Sorry, for the essay. Just think it is very interesting, particularly of those who want children in the future. (Plus, I'm a genetics dork :oops:).
Click to expand...

Thank you for taking the time to post this with the references as well - I'm really interested in genetics as I'm looking to have a baby in the next 3-4 years. Think I'll be reading a little further into this!
 
Anne Hathaway in Vogue (nov 2010)...what do you think?

Anne-Hathaway-as-Audrey-Hepburn-in-Vogue-November-2010-550x457.jpg

anne-hathaway-vogue-november-2010-white-gown-spiral-staircase-towncar-590ls101810.jpg

GD6wA-1dc47f.jpg

Anne_Hathaway_Vogue_November_07.jpg

Anne_Hathaway_Vogue_November_06.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
They would have said she looked awesome and supermodel thin if she had a tan and long flowing fake extensions instead of pale skin and short hair, let's be real.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
shauna said:
They would have said she looked awesome and supermodel thin if she had a tan and long flowing fake extensions instead of pale skin and short hair, let's be real.
Click to expand...

^this

I don't know if it is the dress but she looks like the only place she lost weight is her face, giving her an unbalanced look.

:disgusted: her arms
article-0-12A9F9BE000005DC-173_306x486.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Serene said:
^this

I don't know if it is the dress but she looks like the only place she lost weight is her face, giving her an unbalanced look.
Click to expand...

idk, i think it's the dress that doesn't show how thin she's gotten. but i agree, they only say she looks "wasted away" because of the short hair and paleness.
 
SatelliteEyes said:
Oh my god I like her about 10000x more now, and I've always had a soft spot for her!

Her face is confusing to me haha... I think with certain angles and makeup, she's absolutely stunning, but other times I don't find her attractive. Hmm.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with the right photographer she is stunning otherwise... not so much!
 
oh, please. It's just her collar bones, and hers always show.. she just has that kind of body.

I'm not sold on this weight loss at all. I want better pictures!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back