Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk • Hacker News Board

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#221

Post by eapressoandcats » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:06 PM UTC

stevesimmons wrote: post #174

eapressoandcats wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a fringe that said being overweight was not unhealthy, but the more salient points were the following: 1. BMI was basically just pulled out of a hat, and it turns out that for many health concerns, the overweight class does better than the normal weight class, with the actual “clearly worse” outcomes really coming up as you trend into obesity. 2. Environmental and genetic factors are huge contributors to pe…

To your point 4, we have lots of good reasons why people are gaining weight: they eat more. It's not exactly rocket science. Obvious reasons include: a) food is very cheap, especially processed food b) portion sizes are comically large in the US c) ubiquity of snacking and eating on the go, which is mostly high calorie d) few people smoke now, and cigarettes are potent appetite suppressants e) less social disapproval…

Re point a, cheap calories have been around in abundance for 5 decades. The trend has actually been toward more fresh food being available, not more junk (most candies, sodas, and white bread brands are ancient).

lol at point e.

This is so not true. For a while there was a tiny blip where a corner of the internet was fat friendly.

I know a black lesbian from the south who was obese and managed to lose fat by weightlifting. She said by far being obese was worse socially than either of the other things. As part of getting in shape she started jogging and people mocked her for being fat while exercising.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#222

Post by llm_nerd » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:09 PM UTC

card_zero wrote: post #212

llm_nerd wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The world didn't suddenly decide to get less active all of a sudden In many ways, yes it did . There is a shocking decline in active calories in every developed country, and it has been exported to the developing world as well. People are astonishingly lazy, on the average. Like, Christ, it's so bad that the recommendation to take a brief, slow walk after meals is revolutionary now. Because the average person just w…

But there's the exercise paradox, which is that it doesn't work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_paradox Possibly it works in the extremes, but if so, it's modern and unnatural.

Exercise and basic activity absolutely, unequivocally "works" for removing glucose from blood, which was the foundation of this argument. I'm not giving people diet advice. Indeed, we were talking about frosted flakes, and there are cyclists that have glucose energy drinks -- massive dumps of glucose -- that they consume while riding, and the impact on their blood sugar is utterly negligible. Because activity is an incredible modulator, given that your muscles literally run on glucose, and of course your leg muscles are your largest consumers.

Further, the Hadza study in no universe declared that it requires activity "in the extremes"[1] to alter energy consumption. Not only was their activity not particularly large, they were 112lb men consuming 2,650 calories a day (which is huge for that small of a man. The caloric recommendation for a 112lb active man is 2,000 calories...). The human body is not a magic energy machine that harvest energy from the air, and while it can modulate some things such as "fidgeting" and some other basic processes, the idea that the activity you do doesn't reflect your energy consumption has zero scientific backing.

The exercise paradox is that someone consuming enormous amounts of food but then adding a little exercise routine probably isn't going to achieve much. Which...of course. Control the calories going in is infinitely more effective. But anyone trying to assuage themselves by declaring the exercise paradox for why they're sedentary is cosmically misinformed. The fact that active Hadza men stayed lean on what would normally be considered a massive caloric excess is not the evidence for this belief.

[1] - Paradoxically the study actually entirely contradicts the way you are using it, and I think you might have heard a poor summary of it. The study wasn't that activity doesn't use more calories -- of course it does as the human body isn't a perpetual motion machine -- but rather that going from a lot of activity to an extreme amount of activity starts to plateau and doesn't just linearly move up forever, as the body will start conserving elsewhere. So no, it doesn't require "extreme" exercise, and that is not at all what the study says. And if a 112lb American sedentary man was consuming 2,650 calories a day, they quickly would be significantly more than 112lbs.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#223

Post by preg_match » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:10 PM UTC

aucisson_masque wrote: post #192

alyandon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar experience here on minimal dose of GLP-1. There is definitely something going on here other than "you are just losing weight and that's really why you are healthier". With my labs at my current weight you can not tell that I am a type 2 diabetic. Previously, when I was at this very same weight in the past - all my labs indicated I was prediabetic.

Could be just because you stopped eating bad food. Things improve dramatically once you limit your intake of industrialized food.

Not that dramatically. Things like fatty liver take a long time to reverse. It’s not like you stop eating junk food and then suddenly your body is chilling. No, the damage is done and takes a long time to repair. It’s like smoking. You can benefits from quitting smoking within 20 minutes. But to reach the full benefit and reversal, you need 15 years.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#224

Post by preg_match » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:13 PM UTC

SubmarineClub wrote: post #170

eapressoandcats wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also clearly have some impacts on metabolism. It’s well known that a challenge with dieting isn’t just eating less, it’s metabolic changes that make weight loss harder. GLP-1’s avoid that.

> metabolic changes that make weight loss harder Which are vastly overblown. I diet every year as part of bodybuilding, at a range of intensities and durations, and have never had issues with sudden metabolic changes that make it harder to lose weight.

Your body naturally tries to maintain homeostasis. When you cut your food supply below what your average is, and probably has been for years, your body will fight you in every way it can.

For example, I eat too much and started eating less. I now eat normal portions instead of portions fit for 2 people. I have more than enough food and energy, and yet, I am hungry. The hunger is fake, I certainly don’t need more calories. But my body thinks it does based off of its knowledge.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#225

Post by to11mtm » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:14 PM UTC

tacon wrote: post #147

brokensegue wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there evidence supporting the idea that sugar is more satiating? My understanding was that they were equally unhealthy

No, the evidence is that there is no significant difference in satiety. HFCS is 55% fructose / 45% glucose, while sucrose is 50% fructose / 50% glucose.

Well, There's at least this as a start... https://nutrition.org/sugars-created-equal-lets-talk-fructos...

Not saying Sugar itself is much better, however, yes, there is research indicating that the two are metabolized differently, so that difference in composition should be considered.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#226

Post by folkrav » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:26 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #70

kwanbix wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if you consider that is much cheaper to eat trash than healthy, and that food companies' only interest is in maximizing profit, you have what we have.

I don't buy that. You can buy a steak and a potato for two for less than a bag of Doritos. A banana costs far less than a candy bar. A bag of mixed nuts will provide many meals. Price out a bag of rice, a bag of beans, etc. > food companies' only interest is in maximizing profit Pleasing your customers is how profit is maximized. Besides, I bet if you were faced with two stores, one that charges $x for A, and another…

> Pleasing your customers is how profit is maximized.

If you ignore everything like, including but not limited to, market capture, addictive products, lock-in, information asymmetry, planned obsolescence, dark patterns, captive markets, artificial scarcity, seldom-lucrative-yet-important services and any externality, very true!

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#227

Post by epihelix » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:28 PM UTC

dev_l1x_be wrote: post #83

bariswheel wrote: post #48

tdlr: This is a Novo Nordisk-funded study focusing on predictive biomarkers rather than real-world dementia cases. Novo Nordisk's actual dedicated clinical trials for Alzheimer's completely failed to show that semaglutide stops cognitive decline. "A predictive biomarker is like a "check engine" light on your dashboard. It warns you that there is a risk of a future problem. In this study, the researchers only checked…

Not only that but high intakes of added sugars and fast-acting, high-glycemic carbohydrates are linked to an increased risk of cognitive decline and dementia. Excess simple sugars, particularly fructose and sucrose, promote insulin resistance, chronic inflammation, and vascular damage that impair brain function and accelerate neurodegeneration. So with other words, you diet is a major contributing factor here. The me…

Diabetes is well known to be a massive risk factor for dementia - so no, people are not ignoring this!?

More broadly, diet is a frustrating modifiable risk factor - there are lots of studies suggesting the (somewhat nebulous) "Mediterranean" diet is protective, and beyond that, omega 3s.

But human diet is uncontrolled, highly varied, and reporting is difficult to obtain and unreliable (people don't want to admit what they ate), so a lot of these data are seen as interesting, promising but unconfirmed.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#228

Post by danielmarkbruce » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:31 PM UTC

akiselev wrote: post #177

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GLP-1s have been used for over 20 years. There likely is enough data to say something , even if it's not water tight.

They've been used for over 20 years but until they became a weight loss drug recently, almost all of the research was on diabetics which introduces two confounding factors: diabetes and the diets diabetics already have to follow to manage the disease. It's hard to draw any conclusions when the results are muddied by those two factors.

[dead]

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#229

Post by folkrav » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:32 PM UTC

to11mtm wrote: post #122

dbalatero wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting a steak and potato for 2 for less than a bag of Doritos? Is it a 50 lb bag of Doritos?

.... At least 10 to 15-ish years ago, I would actually be closer to agreeing; You could get Cube or Chuck steak for 3-5$ a pound and potatoes were cheap as hell too. Toss some diced onion in and You'll have a good dinner. How do I know? Well I grew up in a family where for... reasons [0] we were not that well off for quite a while. Cube Steak was one of the big things we did for a family meal that Dad cooked. (Chili…

I'm québécois, my grandma came from a big family (12 siblings IIRC). She used to cook with ground beef all the time cause that's what her mother cooked with too - it was THE cheap source of protein. Meat loaf, shepherds pie, meat pie, beef and cheese macaroni, the whole shebang. Nowadays, when I cook any of those meals, it's cause I feel like eating that specific thing, but it often turns out to be the most expensive meal of the week.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#230

Post by kccqzy » Sat, Aug 15, 2026, 11:34 PM UTC

anon291 wrote: post #169

kccqzy wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m also active and fat. And to me being active is more important than losing weight; I’d rather continue to do those long 2000kcal bike rides on weekends than having a healthier BMI. I’ve heard stories of my own friends bonking during a ride and I decided that I wanted to err on the side of overeating. So semaglutide doesn’t interest me. You aren’t the only one I’ve heard who started to have no energy after being on…

Being active is great but fat is still dangerous. Let's not lie to ourselves. > decided that I wanted to err on the side of overeating The reason you bonk is because you've run out of sugar in your muscles not fat

True, but sugar can be converted to fat in the body. If you eat too much sugar before/during a ride, the extra sugar becomes fat.