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

Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

medicalxpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 394 posts

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#171

Post by lelandfe »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #150
ge96 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that an anti-pattern to put the comment inside the function vs above

Function documentation goes inside functions in Python, explicitly making them self-documenting. That can then be automatically picked up by any other code (like tooling for automatically generating API documentation) formalized as PEP 257, https://peps.python.org/pep-0257 Python will literally assign the content of your docstring (a triple-quoted string at the start of a function) to a special double underscored ("d…

TIL __doc__! Pretty nifty.

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#172

Post by hedora »

thom wrote: post #7

Delighted to discover this kind of breakthrough is based on a gnarly regular expression: https://github.com/Svensson-Lab/pro-hormone-predictor/blob/m...

That’s only the tip of the iceberg. Here’s “How Perl saved the human genome project” from 1996:

https://bioperl.org/articles/How_Perl_saved_human_genome.htm...

(And of course all the articles about excel renaming genes, and then people trying to clean up the mess…)

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#173

Post by hombre_fatal »

pajamasam wrote: post #52
aitchnyu wrote: post #24

Is the muscle loss a side effect of the drug or of the weight loss?

According to this article, it's a side effect of Ozempic itself. The article goes on to say that the newly discovered molecule can side-step the side-effect and metnioned that "obese mice treated with daily injections of BRP for 14 days lost an average of 3 grams—due almost entirely to fat loss..."

You can't answer the Ozempic case without looking at research that compares people who rapidly lost weight with vs without the drug, and then looking at the %FFM difference between them.

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#174

Post by TheRealPomax »

ge96 wrote: post #168
TheRealPomax wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Function documentation goes inside functions in Python, explicitly making them self-documenting. That can then be automatically picked up by any other code (like tooling for automatically generating API documentation) formalized as PEP 257, https://peps.python.org/pep-0257 Python will literally assign the content of your docstring (a triple-quoted string at the start of a function) to a special double underscored ("d…

interesting TIL too bad we don't have auto doc gen (fastapi what I'm working with atm) edit: not saying it can't be done but our org isn't using auto docs

Yeah, it's one of those "Once you're used to writing doc strings, you have no reason to ever use anything else" but if you don't use them, it can be prohibitively laborious to move whatever alternative you're using over to "PEP-compliant".

(lots of fun dunder functions in Python that make metaprogramming a lot easier, but someone needs to tell you about)

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#175

Post by JohnMakin »

mikenew wrote: post #138
crazygringo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nearly always a side effect of weight loss, and it's a good thing. It's confusing how people act like it's bad. If you're obese, your legs are enormously strong with crazy amounts of muscle. Have you ever seen someone obese do leg presses at the gym? They can handle tons of weight. When you lose weight, you don't need all that extra muscle . If you're carrying around 180 lbs instead of 300 lbs on your frame, all…

That is absurd. Muscle mass is a huge predictor of mortality and anyone who isn't actively strength training and maintaining higher levels of muscle would see a health benefit by doing so. The idea that an overweight person has "too much muscle" is nonsense. The side affect of muscle loss from these glp-1 agonist drugs is a serious downside that everyone should be aware of and try to mitigate if they choose to take t…

Yea what you're replying to is just pure fat-logic that isn't really backed by science. You will lose muscle from calorie restriction - that isn't really in doubt by anyone. However, when cutting weight, you can do a routine that maintains/builds muscle as you cut, to reduce the effect. A body with more lean muscle mass will be able to keep weight off for longer - this has been known, settled, and accepted in weight loss and fitness science for decades now. I've never heard anyone, anywhere posit that muscle loss is good - and would love to see a source, so I can laugh at it.

One insidious thing with these GLP1 drugs, is that they also seemingly affect muscles like the heart. I would not be willing to take one unless the risk of me carrying my weight far outweighed (no pun intended) the risk of the side effects. However, a lot of people seem to be treating it as some kind of miracle fad diet drug, which is concerning.

It also has other side effects like reduced elasticity on skin, etc. I suspect we'll see longer term issues in the next decade from these drugs, and I'm glad alternatives are being explored.

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#176

Post by hombre_fatal »

borgdefenser wrote: post #42
aitchnyu wrote: post #24

Is the muscle loss a side effect of the drug or of the weight loss?

Lean mass is just non-fat mass. That includes much more than just muscle. I can't find any evidence that GLP-1 are catabolic to muscle mass. There is no evidence I can find that GLP-1s do anything above what calorie restriction does. There is a linear relationship between calorie restriction and fat loss down to under 10% body fat. There is so much wrong information on calorie restriction from studies done on people…

Yeah, I just went down a rabbit hole re-looking this up myself.

It seems that there's nothing unique about semaglutide, and %FFM loss is just a function of how rapidly you lose weight.

The most rapid losers on semaglutide have the same %FFM loss (30%) as bariatric patients, for example.

And if you don't want to lose weight that fast, you can just temper the dose (unlike with bariatric surgery).

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#177

Post by 999900000999 »

braza wrote: post #94

Maybe this one relates more with the Americans because Ozempic became a trend there: Why are most people jumping on this drug? At least for me, besides all the cliches and stereotypes about the USA people, there's huge access to nutrition, gyms, surgical procedures, capital for buying healthy food, and medicine in general.

Americans are overweight.

Our entire food chain is full of preservatives, carcinogens, and things that should not be consumed by living beings .

I've spent small amounts of time in Europe, and each time literally just eating whatever junk food I wanted, I came home losing 10 or 20 pounds. The food outside of the US is just fundamentally better.

Let's say you're a teenager and you want to buy yourself some soda, in America the vast majority of the time you're not getting real sugar, you're getting hyper processed corn syrup. Before you know it all types of weird crap isn't everything you eat. And this has disastrous effects .

Ozempic is really a shortcut to an extremely complicated problem. Realistically if you want to eat quality food you have to move to another country, it's that bad.

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#178

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

n4r9 wrote: post #159
toast0 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything is chemicals. Free electrons and neutrons aren't chemicals. Free protons are Hydrogen ions though. With the exception of protons, isolated subatomic particle in general aren't chemicals.

Nicely up-pedanted. Ultimately I meant that saying stuff like "I don't want food with chemicals in it" is sloppy, because food itself is made of chemicals.

As a presumptive juror I was once asked how I felt about "chemical evidence". I responded by arguing that pretty much all evidence is chemical evidence. I challenged the room to contradict me (which they could've, but nobody did).

I ended up on the jury, so apparently this performance successfully masked my pro-defense bias.

"Chemical evidence" turned out to mean measurements of pupil dilation as evidence of an inability to drive safely.

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#179

Post by vlovich123 »

thom wrote: post #7

Delighted to discover this kind of breakthrough is based on a gnarly regular expression: https://github.com/Svensson-Lab/pro-hormone-predictor/blob/m...

> The study would not have been possible without the use of artificial intelligence to weed through dozens of proteins in a class called prohormones.

I see we’re being fast and loose with the term “artificial intelligence”?

Re: Natural occurring molecule rivals Ozempic in weight loss, sidesteps side effects

#180

Post by cma »

JohnMakin wrote: post #175
mikenew wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is absurd. Muscle mass is a huge predictor of mortality and anyone who isn't actively strength training and maintaining higher levels of muscle would see a health benefit by doing so. The idea that an overweight person has "too much muscle" is nonsense. The side affect of muscle loss from these glp-1 agonist drugs is a serious downside that everyone should be aware of and try to mitigate if they choose to take t…

Yea what you're replying to is just pure fat-logic that isn't really backed by science. You will lose muscle from calorie restriction - that isn't really in doubt by anyone. However, when cutting weight, you can do a routine that maintains/builds muscle as you cut, to reduce the effect. A body with more lean muscle mass will be able to keep weight off for longer - this has been known, settled, and accepted in weight…

Don't you also need a bigger heart when you gain weight and not need as big of one at less weight? Liposuction and amputations can also result in muscle loss in the heart from it having less work to do.
Post reply on HN