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

261–270 of 394 posts

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

#261

Post by Centigonal »

marpstar wrote: post #203
catigula wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been very, very skeptical of this claim. If there's an actual natural, identified substance with huge benefits to people, it's going to go gangbusters and you're going to make a lot, LOT of money selling it, even if you're doing it via roadside lemonade stand. It feels like this claim is usually used to promote cures and treatments with extremely low quality RCTs backing their use as a sort of panacea. I…

I'm skeptical of your claim because if there's any additional margin to be made doing it artificially, at big-pharma scale history shows that they plenty willing to squeeze every penny out that they can even if it's less effective/natural.

Red Yeast rice exists, and so does lovastatin (Altoprev)

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

#262

Post by inglor_cz »

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…

"The idea that an overweight person has "too much muscle" is nonsense."

Our bodies like to have a balance of everything.

"Muscle mass is a huge predictor of mortality"

In biology, most such predictors work only up to a point. Massively muscular people don't live to be 120. Bodies don't work in a straightforward fashion, and there are other effects to consider. For example, activation of the mTOR pathway, associated with tissue growth, is associated with shorter lifespan, and mTOR inhibitors like rapamycin seem to be modestly prolonging lives of many species.

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

#263

Post by throwup238 »

thayne wrote: post #185

Since it is naturally occurring, it isn't patentable. Which means it is less likely that companies will develop a commercial product from it. Why pay to get FDA approval, if you don't get a government granted monopoly on it afterwards? This is one problem with using patents as the mechanism to incentivise development of medicine.

That’s not exactly true. Cannabidiol (CBD) is naturally occurring and there’s a commercial FDA approved drug for epileptic seizures in children called Epidiolex. If I remember correctly, the patent is for “Oral cannabinoid formulations”.

Even without a patent, companies can get FDA exclusivity but for not as long as a patent grants them so unless the addressable market is huge, it’s a financially riskier bet.

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

#264

Post by inglor_cz »

naasking wrote: post #206
s1artibartfast wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge conflation of cause and effect with respect to muscle mass and longevity. Low muscle mass is associated a broad swath of illnesses, low activity, and generally poor health. Muscle mass's power as a predictor is not the same as it's utility as an intervention.

As long as you're not using exogenous hormones, muscle mass can only be achieved with exercise that builds or preserves muscle. I'd say that's a pretty good predictor against frailty, which is strongly associated with mortality among the elderly.

True, but frailty in the old age has a reason that cannot fully be mitigated with exercise: depletion of stem cells. The same mechanism will make our blood vessels thin and prone to bursting etc.

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

#265

Post by hollerith »

tokai wrote: post #259
catigula wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been very, very skeptical of this claim. If there's an actual natural, identified substance with huge benefits to people, it's going to go gangbusters and you're going to make a lot, LOT of money selling it, even if you're doing it via roadside lemonade stand. It feels like this claim is usually used to promote cures and treatments with extremely low quality RCTs backing their use as a sort of panacea. I…

Lithium is a good counter. It is by far the best treatment for bipolar 1, and its cheap and easy to source. Prices for lithium carbonate and other lithium medicament's are not at all cheap, and there are not a lot of medical companies producing it. There has even been shortages. Instead antipsychotics have been pushed as a preferred treatment, even though the outcomes are worse than with lithium.

Lithium in dosages effective in treating a mood disorder is quite toxic (e.g., to the kidneys) so most of the price is probably to offset the risk of lawsuit awards.

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

#266

Post by J_Shelby_J »

ddalex wrote: post #183
cosmie wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could be that they relied on AI to generate the gnarly regex ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Any sufficiently advanced regex is indistinguishable from AI.

With enough if statements, you could create a LLM.

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

#267

Post by swat535 »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #204
vlovich123 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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”?

AI is the new, “Algorithm”. It is an overly broad term that basically means, “Technology” to people who use it.

For non-technical people, terms like Machine Learning, Algorithm, Automation, AI, Neural Networks and 'Magical Powers' are synonymous.. Journalists, marketing teams, and executives choose whichever term generates the most hype and clicks.

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

#268

Post by archimedes237 »

anotherpaul wrote: post #257
raylad wrote: post #188

This is the press release that is being republished with ads in the post link https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/03/ozempic-rival...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08683-y This seems to be the paper, but its behind a paywall. Anyone with access can tell me if they publish the 12mer amino acid sequence? Is there more to it (post translational modifications) Or is it just the peptide?

Note, I have access but this is not my field. I just asked ChatGPT your question after have it read the paper. This is what the response was:

Yes, the paper provides the 12-mer amino acid sequence of BRP: THRILRRLFNLC .

Regarding post-translational modifications, the BRP peptide was synthesized with a C-terminal amidation, which was critical for its bioactivity. The non-amidated version of BRP was inactive in vitro . Additionally, the paper mentions that the C-terminal cysteine (C12) was synthesized as a free thiol .

So, BRP is not just a simple peptide—it has a key post-translational modification (C-terminal amidation) that influences its function.

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

#269

Post by RandallBrown »

swat535 wrote: post #267
AlwaysRock wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI is the new, “Algorithm”. It is an overly broad term that basically means, “Technology” to people who use it.

For non-technical people, terms like Machine Learning, Algorithm, Automation, AI, Neural Networks and 'Magical Powers' are synonymous.. Journalists, marketing teams, and executives choose whichever term generates the most hype and clicks.

I like to describe my job as a software engineer as "wizardry" to people. With the way LLMs are writing code, it's only getting closer to writing actual spells.

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

#270

Post by crazygringo »

sn9 wrote: post #242
crazygringo wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yea what you're replying to is just pure fat-logic I can't even imagine what that's supposed to mean. > However, when cutting weight, you can do a routine that maintains/builds muscle as you cut, to reduce the effect. I literally talked about staying physically active. The point is, you're going to have however much muscle your workouts and physical activity build/maintain . And you're going to lose whatever extra…

The reason you want to keep all your muscle on a cut is because that means a higher proportion of the weight that you do lose will be fat tissue. This is the strictly superior outcome.

If you're "cutting" as part of bulking and cutting, then obviously.

But if you're going from obese to healthy, then your goal isn't to retain all your leg muscle, that's absurd. Your goal is to get to a healthy weight with overall balanced healthy muscle -- not disproportionately large legs.

Nothing is "strictly superior". What is best depends on what your goals are. Bodybuilding and not being obese any more involve wildly different measures of success.

Post reply on HN