Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 348 posts

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#241

Post by rebuilder »

pif wrote: post #171
taneq wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weight loss isn't "known intractable". Physically it's very simple, if an overweight person is physically prevented from eating too much, they'll lose weight, just like physically it's very simple to quit addictive drugs. And the drug analogy is a good one, because just like quitting drugs, you can't quit overeating (barring the aforementioned option of someone physically preventing you from doing so - which is liter…

> Weight loss isn't "known intractable". Indeed, weight loss is "simple", as you said. The problem arises when you have managed to get to your target and you realize that, short of amphetamines or similarly dangerous drugs, there is no known way to keep your weight stable with an acceptable life quality . Obese people are not stupid when they choose to keep eating; they've just learnt by experience that, unless you s…

Regarding the hunger problem - is increasing calorie consumption a viable option? A physically active male with significant muscle mass can fairly reasonably find himself needing about 3000 kcal a day without having to be a pro athlete. Would becoming much more active and gaining lean mass help, or would the amount of food needed to feel sated just increase?

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#242

Post by Spooky23 »

grardb wrote: post #70
mamcx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not work? But except for the parent and a lot of other people.

Seriously. I always roll my eyes when somebody claims that acupuncture "doesn't work," because it's worked for me on multiple occasions. Typically, it comes from people who have never tried it. A little over four years ago, I had a ton of shoulder pain. I went to two doctors, had an MRI scan, and was prescribed physical therapy. After all of that, I was still in pain, and neither of the doctors could figure out why,…

It "doesn't work" because it isn't repeatable or predictable. My wife has a similar story to yours... I had a zero effect experience with the same practitioner.

Like chiropractic, there is "something" there, but it's mostly mild physical relief + belief/placebo effect.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, especially for pain relief where the alternatives are pretty high impact (surgery, ineffective narcotics, other treatments that lose efficiency over time). The problem is there are practitioners who claim to cure cancer, etc, and there's no way for anyone to vet that.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#243

Post by mirimir »

zurn wrote: post #156
taneq wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weight loss isn't "known intractable". Physically it's very simple, if an overweight person is physically prevented from eating too much, they'll lose weight, just like physically it's very simple to quit addictive drugs. And the drug analogy is a good one, because just like quitting drugs, you can't quit overeating (barring the aforementioned option of someone physically preventing you from doing so - which is liter…

Constant application of great amounts of willpower against your most basic biological instincts is possible for some individuals, but generally you are really arguing against the dictionary definition [1]. [1] [trak-tuh-buh l] .. easily managed or controlled; docile; yielding:

There's been strong selection, I suspect, for overeating when food is available. Also for focusing utilization on essential stuff when it's limited.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#244

Post by CogitoCogito »

rebuilder wrote: post #241
pif wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Weight loss isn't "known intractable". Indeed, weight loss is "simple", as you said. The problem arises when you have managed to get to your target and you realize that, short of amphetamines or similarly dangerous drugs, there is no known way to keep your weight stable with an acceptable life quality . Obese people are not stupid when they choose to keep eating; they've just learnt by experience that, unless you s…

Regarding the hunger problem - is increasing calorie consumption a viable option? A physically active male with significant muscle mass can fairly reasonably find himself needing about 3000 kcal a day without having to be a pro athlete. Would becoming much more active and gaining lean mass help, or would the amount of food needed to feel sated just increase?

You have to be pretty careful. It's actually quite common for people to _gain_ weight when training for a marathon because they often end up eating more than they burn during the runs. For me at about 185 pounds, I'll burn around 870 calories by running 10k:

http://www.runnersworld.com/tools/calories-burned-calculator

I could gain those calories back and more in 15 minutes just eating a burger. A lot of people do exactly this and sabotage themselves a bit.

Personally if I bump up my running training and want to lose weight, I can never depend on it happening naturally. I always gain weight if I don't actively try to lose it. So I think no matter what you need to be careful. If you exercise more, you'll be able to eat more, but if you want to lose weight, you'll still need to eat less than your body wants. So I still think fundamentally losing the pounds starts in the kitchen.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#245

Post by ghettoCoder »

pif wrote: post #207
mukundmr wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched to one full meal a day and fruits / salads / soup for the other times. This takes care of hunger issues and helps with losing weight. Change of habit is required and it is not easy. Bariatric surgery can help, but it has it's own annoying side effects and long term (>7 years) reports aren't available widely.

> Change of habit is required Sure, obesity is clearly (also) a problem of bad habits. The question that still needs an answer is: when will the new habit become natural for me? Hunger is not like exercising: while a couple years of training can make a marathon feel natural for the body of a former sedentary person, no amount of training (AFAIK) can either ease the feeling of satiety with the correct amount of calori…

This might sound glib but it's not meant to be; habit and discipline take over after desire fails.

Meaning you need to establish a new normal for yourself. Maybe that means no more soda (not even the sugar free crap) and no ketchup on your fries. After a while weight comes off and stays off without you missing the extra calories.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#247

Post by ghettoCoder »

pif wrote: post #216
nradov wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes of course I've experienced it. Being a little hungry is just like being a little too cold or feeling minor pain. Put it aside and get on with life.

Thanks for replying. Now it's clear that you don't know what you are talking about. Rudeness intended :-)

You come off sounding like all of the whiners on various Reddit fitness subs complaining about how they can't lose weight, or their lift numbers aren't going up just looking for someone to tell them that's it ok to quit or ease-up. To steal from fitit, have you tried trying.

rudeness intended.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#248

Post by michaelt »

rebuilder wrote: post #241
pif wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Weight loss isn't "known intractable". Indeed, weight loss is "simple", as you said. The problem arises when you have managed to get to your target and you realize that, short of amphetamines or similarly dangerous drugs, there is no known way to keep your weight stable with an acceptable life quality . Obese people are not stupid when they choose to keep eating; they've just learnt by experience that, unless you s…

Regarding the hunger problem - is increasing calorie consumption a viable option? A physically active male with significant muscle mass can fairly reasonably find himself needing about 3000 kcal a day without having to be a pro athlete. Would becoming much more active and gaining lean mass help, or would the amount of food needed to feel sated just increase?

I heard a radio program a few years ago about childhood obesity. They had an expert on who said something I'd never really thought of before: They said the conventional causality of sports curing obesity is the wrong way around. The reason you don't see fat marathon runners isn't because running makes you thin, it's because being thin makes it easier to run.

The guy's reasoning was: You exercise for an hour doing something like walking or golf, then reward yourself with a snack? Net intake of calories [1]. And it's easier to cut a snack from your diet than to find the time and motivation to do an hour's exercise.

To put it another way, when you're obese exercising is like a job that pays ten cents an hour.

Of course, once you've become thin and athletic, you gain access to more time-efficient types of exercise. But that snack might still need 15 minutes of vigorous cycling, or competitive soccer or basketball.

[1] e.g. an hour's dog-walking or golf are roughly equivalent to a 16 fl.oz can of Coca-Cola and a 2 oz packet of skittles, respectively.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#249

Post by specialist »

heisenbit wrote: post #192
specialist wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My number one advice is to not accept "No". Someone out there has an answer for you. Keep asking, educating yourself, searching. Dr. Srinivasan in Seattle did my spinal fusion. She's the best. http://seattleneuro.com/about_dr-srinivasan/ If you are trying to find a neurosurgeon near you... Ask Srinivasan for a referral. Or find other doctors that learned, practiced, taught where she did (birds of a feather).

I'm all for being relentless when searching for answers. And then for relentless researching and checking them. It is important however also to hear the "No", as the article explains: Most doctors would say "No" when it comes to their own backs. There are certainly a lot of spine doctors out pushing procedures but anyone who is on the desperate search for a solution likely also heard from another doctor the word "No"…

Word.

I've been sick (chronic life threatening illness) my entire adult life. I've done some very stupid things, knowingly and unknowingly. And a handful of my doctors, care providers have harmed me. But what else you gonna do?

I've also had severe back pain that got worse over the years. Finding solutions that worked for me required lots of trial and error.

Now comes my second most important piece of advice:

Everyone must have their own patient advocate. To fight for you, to keep track of what's happening. And to keep you honest. Self assessments are notoriously unreliable.

Re: The $100B per year back pain industry is mostly a hoax

#250

Post by Hasknewbie »

DanBC wrote: post #183
Hasknewbie wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously. I always roll my eyes when somebody claims that acupuncture " does work," because the placebo effect worked for them on multiple occasions. Typically, it comes from people who don't want to admit they were cured by a placebo, otherwise it would work all the time, for everyone . There, fixed it for you.

Here's a link showing that placebo is better than placebo for some types of long term pain. https://discover.dc.nihr.ac.uk/portal/article/4000672/acupun...

Not all meta-studies agree on this. But the real point in my opinion is this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19250001

Acupuncture is a sham because sham acupuncture appears to do just as well. What matters is if you get stung by a real needle. All the acupuncture-specific things, like meridians, points, qi, are just tosh, which means pseudo-acupuncture can be performed by any nurse, and does not require a costly 'expert'. So "real acupuncture" is just, in fact, an unnecessary ornament that can be discarded.

Having been raised by your average new-age / alternative medicine parents, and having believed and used these things until my mid-twenties, I'm not surprised that needles do have an effect. I am also not surprised it does not come from acupuncture proper.

If you say 'having vague pain points stung by needles is better than placebo', then I would agree with you, but that's quite different than saying that acupuncture works.

Post reply on HN