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

How long til we're all on Ozempic?

asteriskmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#201

Post by ocular-rockular »

honkycat wrote: post #123
grecy wrote: post #94

My god no. I'm 42 and I've never taken more than the odd painkiller or antibiotic here or there - less than a pill a year on average I'm sure. The last thing in the world I want is to be permanently on some drug that alters how my body works. I hike, snowboard, go to the gym and eat sensibly. That's all the "weight control" I need.

Good for you man. 40% of the US is obese, we need a solution for better health outcomes.

So drugs?

I think it's a lot simpler than that. US has an abusive relationship with junk/processed food. It's so deeply ingrained due to profit margins, wealth inequities, nonsensical subsidies, etc. that the only feasible solution is to introduce a drug that continues to allow that relationship to continue.

It's a lot easier of a solution than it is to tell companies to stop making garbage or saturating everything with sugar and HFCS. "Easier to see end of the world than end to capitalism" -- its the same shit packaged in a different story... Easier to introduce a drug to treat the symptoms than to solve the actual problem.

Mind you, I'm not implying that it is easy. We have collectively accepted this which makes change difficult if not impossible.

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#202

Post by from-nibly »

dfxm12 wrote: post #170

Instead of a system that makes these drug available for purchase, I'd rather live in a system that promotes healthy food and active behavior. Unfortunately, I have to drive everywhere, work too many hours to have free time for recreation and have no idea which government subsidy is going to help big ag likely at the expense of my health. All things being equal, I'd prefer to spend less money on prescriptions and have…

You don't have to worry about which government subsidy is going to help big ag at the expense of your health. It's all of them.

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#203

Post by epolanski »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #3

My biggest fear is either there will be long term negative consequences to Ozempic et al, and a huge swath of the population will be dealing with issues 30 years form now - OR - there will be some long term positive consequence to using Ozempic et al, and I'm not getting any of the benefits because I'm not overweight.

[flagged]

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#204

Post by rootusrootus »

pfdietz wrote: post #126
arcticbull wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Just eat less and exercise more" is trite. If it were that easy, we'd all be in fantastic shape. Studies show it just doesn't work. There was a massive (18,000,000 people) cohort analysis published in 2023 that showed the likelihood of someone losing 5% of their body weight in any given year was 1 in 11 and the likelihood of going from severely obese to normal weight is 1 in 1667. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/…

I've lost 27 pounds since May (12%). Eliminating most carbs and doing lots of walking. I think being on metformin helped.

I did that in 2020. May through November. 40 pounds off. Then I sprained my ankle. I apologize for being negative, but come back in a year and let us know how it's going. Many, many people can lose 10%, 20%, even 30% of their body weight with concerted effort. Works for a year or maybe two. It's actually pretty easy, to be honest, most people who've done it will agree with me.

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#205

Post by logicchains »

djsavvy wrote: post #131

My pet crackpot theory is that within the next 100 years semaglutide is going to be in the drinking water (much like fluoride) because the benefit to society is going to be too hard to pass up on. However, it seems that it's delivered via injection so maybe putting it in the water supply wouldn't even be effective.

It's funny you say that because just now the US is starting to re-consider water fluoridation: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/04/fluoridation... .

It's also relative uncommon in other developed countries; according to Wikipedia, "Out of a population of about three-quarters of a billion, under 14 million people (approximately 2%) in Europe receive artificially-fluoridated water. Those people are in the UK (5,797,000), Republic of Ireland (4,780,000), Spain (4,250,000), and Serbia (300,000)."

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#206

Post by oremolten »

arcticbull wrote: post #105
rootusrootus wrote: post #10

I'd think it more likely that it'll be one of the next generation drugs, but I do agree with the premise that it will be really common. A few weeks ago I started a low dose of tirzepatide (aka Mounjaro, aka Zepbound) and the side effects are interesting. The biggest negative, which just takes adjustment, is drastically lower stomach capacity. Used to be that two eggs and two pieces of toast was breakfast. Now I bette…

> "Just eat less and exercise more" is trite. If it were that easy, we'd all be in fantastic shape. Studies show it just doesn't work. There was a massive (18,000,000 people) cohort analysis published in 2023 that showed the likelihood of someone losing 5% of their body weight in any given year was 1 in 11 and the likelihood of going from severely obese to normal weight is 1 in 1667. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/…

it's interesting you state "Studies show it just doesn't work." While we are commenting on an article about a drug which makes you feel less hungry, there by "eating less". The drug doesn't make you use more calories, it simply "makes" you EAT LESS. Eating less(calories) than your body uses consistently for duration is literally the only way you can lose weight. (outside of literally losing limbs, or surgery to remove mass) Exercise only augments the process, it all comes back down to EATING LESS(calories).

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#207

Post by johnrob »

Spivak wrote: post #98
BoingBoomTschak wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the negative consequence on the value of willpower is pretty obvious. "In what measure" is the real question.

You have the completely wrong take on this. Dieting destroys your relationship with food. Basically every adult woman exhibits some level of disordered eating because of it— "girl dinner" is both funny because it's true and sad. Being able to lose weight while continuing to eat is a wonderful thing. There is no virtue in spending your willpower making your body do something it desperately doesn't want to do. That's s…

We are human animals. Our bodies need healthy food and regular exercise. There’s a case that diet and exercise are worth willpower capacity, possibly more so than anything else. That’s just the reality we exist in?

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#208

Post by petesergeant »

rqtwteye wrote: post #4

It's a pretty sad thought that everybody will be on a drug that keeps weight in check while most people will still eat a basically toxic diet. Weight is certainly an important factor but there is more to a healthy life.

> while most people will still eat a basically toxic diet

It's a pretty sadder fact that people just make these wild assertions. Everyone I know (which is about 10 people in real life, myself included) who's used a GLP-1 drug found that they eat healthier because they've less desire for shittier food.

Re: How long til we're all on Ozempic?

#209

Post by paulcole »

dfxm12 wrote: post #170

Instead of a system that makes these drug available for purchase, I'd rather live in a system that promotes healthy food and active behavior. Unfortunately, I have to drive everywhere, work too many hours to have free time for recreation and have no idea which government subsidy is going to help big ag likely at the expense of my health. All things being equal, I'd prefer to spend less money on prescriptions and have…

This is like saying, "All things being equal, I'd prefer Santa Claus bring presents on Christmas Eve than have to go shopping for my kids."

It's like well duh of course you'd prefer the impossibly unrealistic miracle.

Post reply on HN