531–540 of 1001 posts
[flagged]
"Weight loss is a journey" -> it doesn't have to be, and it isn't for me anymore.
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…
I wonder how breaking old habits and establishing new habits over a year or so would stop a serious rebound?
Convincing people to not fool around never worked so the birth control pill was invented to allow people to indulge with less consequences. I recall someone (I forget who) said that things that prevent you from eating will never work and the only solution is something that allows you to indulge without the consequences. Does this drug allow you to indulge without consequences or does it make you not want to eat? If i…
Why wouldn't satiety drugs be helpful?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this were true I would not expect that changes in our lifestyle would cause broad scale weight increases like they have. I'm very skeptical humans are built with an average set weight way up in the unhealthy range. Or maybe this is the case, but it is thrown off hard by our modern diets. Our natural set point is in the healthy range, but our meal is x calories per Y food now so it ends up artificially high. The ex…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_point_theory may help > but it is thrown off hard by our modern diets. Yes. I think the dominant theory is that it has something to do with gut microbiomes, and in particular sugar and/or artificial sweeteners screw it up pretty badly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These foods are specifically addictive. I mean, water is addictive - I need it every three days, but that's not meaningful.
What does "specifically addictive" mean though? People keep saying it, but give no definition for it. And you needing water every three days is meaningful. In fact, that's a great definition! Its clear what the meaning in the case of water is. I'm not sure what saying "Doritos" is addictive means? I love Doritos, but when I traveled abroad I went six months without seeing a bag and never thought of them. What exactly…
Convincing people to not fool around never worked so the birth control pill was invented to allow people to indulge with less consequences. I recall someone (I forget who) said that things that prevent you from eating will never work and the only solution is something that allows you to indulge without the consequences. Does this drug allow you to indulge without consequences or does it make you not want to eat? If i…
>Does this drug allow you to indulge without consequences or does it make you not want to eat? Why wouldn't satiety drugs be helpful?
Edit: It might have novelty support but I'm confident that in the long run people will choose to indulge and get the dopamine.
Thought experiment: A drug* that reduces people's weight and massively boosts physical fitness with no negative side effects is discovered. The discoverer of that drug declines to patent it, making it a cheap generic available everywhere. What would your reaction be? Take a moment to consider what your reaction is before continuing. ... The comments I'm reading here are diverse and fascinating. Weight loss, diet, and…
Let me tell you, the number of thin people I've met who got there through discipline and hard work is vanishingly small compared to those genetically blessed. This is probably why it's such an appealing delusion -- who doesn't want the world to think they're disciplined and hardworking, instead of just lucky?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern nutrition science has found that each person, at any given time, has a "metabolic setpoint". This is basically a target weight that their endocrine system is trying to keep them at. There's a feedback loop, where below this weight hunger hormones will nudge them to eat more and metabolic hormones will lower caloric expenditure (lowering body temperature, sleeping longer, fidgeting more). And vice versa above t…
> Modern nutrition science has found that each person, at any given time, has a "metabolic setpoint". This is basically a target weight that their endocrine system is trying to keep them at. Citation? This goes against everything I've heard from credentialed experts and against my own experience as well. For one thing, it's unclear how you'd explain the weight gain of the median person in the western world over the l…
The phenomena of an ever increasing set point I believe is down to periods of willful over-indulgence that overruns the power of our hormonal homeostasis to recover from so it settles higher than it started when pushed too hard.
Christmas, holidays, times of stress, home-baking passions (my downfall), liquid calories and ultra calorie dense eating-for-leisure that don't stimulate our sense of fullness early enough to stop.
The cruelty is that it's a hell of a lot easier to eat when not hungry than to push a plate away when jonesing for it, so it keeps going up.
Thought experiment: A drug* that reduces people's weight and massively boosts physical fitness with no negative side effects is discovered. The discoverer of that drug declines to patent it, making it a cheap generic available everywhere. What would your reaction be? Take a moment to consider what your reaction is before continuing. ... The comments I'm reading here are diverse and fascinating. Weight loss, diet, and…
> Nutrition and fitness are classic examples of pseudo-science I think it's pretty well agreed upon in the medical community (and proven) that a healthy diet (lots of fruit and vegetables, not too much sugar, etc) and regular exercise leads to better health. It's not pseudo-science. Neither is the statement that consuming more calories than you burn will make you put on weight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did a little bit of research and for people in the UK it appears to be substantially less. I found a few health companies offering it for <$250/mo. I’ll probably wait until it’s readily available on the NHS but it is tempting.
I thought the UK had government healthcare?
It's a case of either paying for a private prescription now, or waiting until it's made more accessible on the NHS.