391–400 of 555 posts
Studies show almost all subjects regained the weight and reversed gains within 2 years. This means underlying issues (e.g., food addiction) aren't being addressed. Short of changing habits, the only maintenance solution is lifelong drug use and that doesn't sit well with me.
I'd take them even if they didn't make me lose weight - and I'm the type of person that doesn't like takeing Tylenol unless absolutely necessary. The best way I can describe it: my body and mind are no longer is in starvation mode. I plan, do, act and sleep well.
>my body and mind are no longer is in starvation mode What does it mean? If a drug reduces your desire to eat food, wouldn't it also decrease your desire to eat food beneficial for your body? I think the effect most people want is to stop craving junk food but still eat nutritious food required for muscle growth and health.
Studies show almost all subjects regained the weight and reversed gains within 2 years. This means underlying issues (e.g., food addiction) aren't being addressed. Short of changing habits, the only maintenance solution is lifelong drug use and that doesn't sit well with me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s the problem with these new weight loss drugs. Ultimately they work by reducing food intake. For many people food is one of the few things in life that gives them some form of joy. I won’t ever take any drug that will take that away from me. Life is depressing enough as is. What we need is a weight loss drug that lets you eat unlimited amounts of food, preferably even suppressing the feeling of fullness, withou…
> For many people food is one of the few things in life that gives them some form of joy. This is the problem to be addressed, not hoping for a miracle drug that will let you chuck down 5,000 calories a day and be healthy, imho.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The latest fad promoted by companies to sell you something?
Eating disorders are mental health condition. Just because there are a lot of visible "false" cases, it doesn't mean that someone else is not living it for real. Your comment is insensitive
Agreed, and often the root cause is something else in a person’s life (stress, feelings of losing control etc ).
Adding new labels related to food doesn’t do anything to fix the underlying conditions and if anything distracts from them and points the blame at food and physiology, which is not often the root cause of over or under eating.
Studies show almost all subjects regained the weight and reversed gains within 2 years. This means underlying issues (e.g., food addiction) aren't being addressed. Short of changing habits, the only maintenance solution is lifelong drug use and that doesn't sit well with me.
Does loss of muscle mass, commonly associated with Ozempic weight loss, become an issue after regaining the weight? Can it result in proportionally more fat at the same body weight as before if exercise wasn't part of the regiment?
If you ingest less calories, you lose both muscle and fat mass.
Studies show almost all subjects regained the weight and reversed gains within 2 years. This means underlying issues (e.g., food addiction) aren't being addressed. Short of changing habits, the only maintenance solution is lifelong drug use and that doesn't sit well with me.
Does loss of muscle mass, commonly associated with Ozempic weight loss, become an issue after regaining the weight? Can it result in proportionally more fat at the same body weight as before if exercise wasn't part of the regiment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no personal animosity toward you, but I've heard all this many times, so I'll respond accordingly. >I've been on a diet since I was 12 years old, and am now approaching 50. I've lost and regained the same 60lbs about 4 times now You can lose weight by crash dieting, which does not prove much. The first thing that comes to mind for people is simply: "I'll just eat very little and lose weight." It even works, bu…
> In my experience, while people know all these things, execution still requires knowing all the "gotchas". In my experience, people that think they know all the "gotchas" don't really know as much as they think they do. Knowing fat is calorie dense is great. Without context one would attempt to try to cut it out of your diet almost entirely. Sort of like what literally happened with the food industry in the 80's/90'…
I highly doubt this. A lot of people think stuff like juice smoothies, granolas or dates are healthy. Or more generally organic or grassfed or "no added sugar" or "high-protein" high-sugar or "unprocessed" stuff.
People are actively misinformed about what's healthy by a constant bombardment of ads, fads and "common sense".
What about the reports of bone density loss? Any downsides to this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because usually you can't study long-term effects before releasing a drug, and even then it can take a long time for them to surface. I took antihistamines basically throughout my 20s. My allergy specialist said there's no reason not to. I developed some other issues and wanted to stop taking antihistamines to see if that would help (or get a hint whether they were causing it) - but that got me into itching hell for…
Do you think going thru an allergy shot regime from an MD allergy Dr is a viable alternative to actually dealing with the undelying allegie(s)? Seems like the issue is unsettled last Inchecked
My experience was about antihistamines, which are definitely effective.