321–330 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With every weight loss intervention when you stop you gain back the weight. GLP-1 agonists don't seem to be any different than another other intervention.
The point is that you could gain back the original weight plus more. Most adults who become obese have not increased their number of fat cells - their fat cells just become larger. The GLP-1 drugs literally increase the number of fat cells.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disagree. People genuinely enjoy those foods, because they're tasty and flavorful. And there's zero reason to believe that they're substantially unhealthy unless consumed to the point of sustained caloric surplus. We know this because we have hunter-gatherer populations who consume 50% of their diets in sugar (e.g. the Hadza) or fats (e.g. Intuit), and they have none of the diseases of abundance found in modern popul…
> And there's zero reason to believe that they're substantially unhealthy unless consumed to the point of sustained caloric surplus. I have a hard time believing this without some very strong evidence for this claim. There's already existing evidence for greatly varying health effects of differences in cooking method, oil-type, omega ratios in fats, amino-acid ratios in proteins, glycemic index of carbs, sodium conte…
Again this shouldn't shock us, because we know hunter-gatherers across the globe eat tremendously varied diets that come in all sorts of extremes. Yet, modern diseases of affluence (heart disease, diabetes, etc.) are virtually non-existent in these populations. The only thing they have in common is a lack of obesity and non-sedentary lifestyle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, your instinct is correct, you have vastly oversimplified it in an unhelpful way. The body is not an energy equation to be balanced. The desire to eat is driven by our hormones and these are not easily overridden by willpower. In fact, study after study shows that willpower is insufficient for most people. Hunger is produced by a complex set of factors that we do not fully understand. What we eat and how we live…
The body is an energy equation to be balanced. Physics defines that. What you are talking about substantially in your post is about willpower with regards to eating and exercise which is totally different.
And sure, there is an energy equation here thermodynamically, but it is unhelpful. It would be something like:
Calories in * X = Calories consumed * Y + Fat stored * Z Where X, Y and Z are unknown and barely controllable factors related to hunger, type of food, digestion, microbiome, hormones, genetics, metabolism, environment, society and so on.
> “I’m really hesitant to be excited about something that I think is potentially harmful from a weight stigma perspective,” says Sarah Nutter, a psychologist at the University of Victoria in Canada, who specializes in weight stigma and body image. Putting the word "stigma" on things is a sure sign of a grifter. Instead of helping solve it, they're trying to make it a social science problem. Being overweight is unheal…
Down's Syndrome is also unhealthy. Should we stigmatize that also? The main issue is control. Many assume that weight is simple and under people's full control. Realistically, though, there are all kinds of reasons why weight gain happens and scientific measurement shows that wild animals are getting bigger too which suggests that pervasive presence of endocrine disrupting agents in the environment may be involved. I…
It's not "stigmatizing" to call something unhealthy which is, at least potentially, controllable. And you cited no information at all about "endocrine disruptors" for the vast majority of obese people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With every weight loss intervention when you stop you gain back the weight. GLP-1 agonists don't seem to be any different than another other intervention.
The point is that you could gain back the original weight plus more. Most adults who become obese have not increased their number of fat cells - their fat cells just become larger. The GLP-1 drugs literally increase the number of fat cells.
This is also common in all weight loss interventions, though the reason is generally from metabolic slowdown, not the creation of new adipose tissues.
> In the past, scientists and the public often thought that those with obesity simply lacked the willpower to lose weight. But evidence is growing that most people’s bodies have a natural size that can be hard to change. In the context where we have gone from obesity rates of 13 percent to 40, to suggest that people have a natural weight and that's the cause of this seems absurd to me.
Absolutely agree. Unironically through the first few paragraphs I though this was some very cleverly put satirical take on modern society. There is a great book about the effects of modern food, primarily on dental health, written back in the 30s - Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston Price. Even though it's almost a century old, the findings are quite fascinating and can be extrapolated to present day. It's…
Yea, people tend to forget pre-green revolution people going hungry for longer periods of time and mass starvation were really common. We made a trade, between the sudden and terrible outcome of starving and hunger to one of long term consequences like obesity and disease.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disagree. People genuinely enjoy those foods, because they're tasty and flavorful. And there's zero reason to believe that they're substantially unhealthy unless consumed to the point of sustained caloric surplus. We know this because we have hunter-gatherer populations who consume 50% of their diets in sugar (e.g. the Hadza) or fats (e.g. Intuit), and they have none of the diseases of abundance found in modern popul…
> The problem is not the food. The problem is obesity. Junk food corporations make profit by selling food, and they are extremely good at this. They rely on intense advertising, making the food addictive, targeting children. As a side effect, people get obese since they consume more calories that what they need. I don't know about GLP-1, but my intuition tells me that no drug is going to make eating Mac Donald's and…
> “I’m really hesitant to be excited about something that I think is potentially harmful from a weight stigma perspective,” says Sarah Nutter, a psychologist at the University of Victoria in Canada, who specializes in weight stigma and body image. Putting the word "stigma" on things is a sure sign of a grifter. Instead of helping solve it, they're trying to make it a social science problem. Being overweight is unheal…
That's awfully harsh. For one, the person making that statement is not the developer of the treatment, she's a psychologist expressing concern about the possible downsides. Namely that the drug is expensive, doesn't work on everyone and hasn't been proven to show long-term beneficial outcomes yet (ie lower morbidity). I'm guessing it's also got a high potential for abuse from people with dysphoria. Nobody is saying w…
and neither is she a doctor or biological scientist. Rather, she's trying to get in on a lucrative field which she has no expertise in.
Petro Dobromylskyj is one of the foremost experts of fat metabolism. He has a blog called Hyperlipid where he's been blogging about fat metabolism and interpreting research for close to 10 years. He thinks the GLP-1 inhibitor drugs will be a disaster in the long term because they 1) cause weight loss but also 2) cause the body to create lots of new adipocyte (fat cells). Increasing the number of adipocytes is very un…