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

Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 430 posts

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#291

Post by taneq »

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.

That’s nice. Many peoples’ experience differs. Congrats on it working on your computer.

Personally on the whole I’ve had no issues with controlling my weight. I’ve had a couple of isolated instances where I felt hungry all the time and started gaining weight rapidly despite my best efforts. Circumstances changed and it stopped. It sucked and I learned a new level of empathy for the people who get this all the time and not just as a one off.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#292

Post by preg_match »

tbugrara wrote: post #287
preg_match wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This isn't true, fatty liver can improve very quickly. Where are you getting "15 years" from?

The 15 years is for smoking. Fatty liver can improve but it’s not gonna be a one day thing. It’s a consistent lifestyle change.

Also, simply cutting out junk food will absolutely not reverse fatty liver. You need to eat less and lose weight.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#293

Post by preg_match »

basilgohar wrote: post #266
preg_match wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are other significant factors beyond the ones you mentioned, such as inflammation due to processed foods, certain oils, and more that are common in industrialized medicine. Plenty of anecdata of people who stopped eating certain categories of food and certain conditions they had for a long time went away. In my son's case, a severe case of eczema that persisted for years went away in a matter of weeks after we…

A lot of this largely is not true. People think that paleothic humans ate a lot of meat - they did not. They ate very little meat, we eat the most meat we’ve ever eaten now.

And the meat they did eat was lean game meat. It was high in unsaturated fats - like our modern day oils. Not like a steak. A steak is a product of farming. It’s a new invention, Yes oils are “refined”, but humans have been eating unsaturated oils predominantly for almost all of our existence. The proliferation of animal fats is very, very new. Really, it’s past 100 years. Before that meat was rare, it was a delicacy, very expensive for people.

Now, high sugar is a different story. But the oil thing is complex, it’s not as a simple as oil bad animal fat good and natural. No, it’s very unnatural.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#295

Post by somenameforme »

preg_match wrote: post #293
basilgohar wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other significant factors beyond the ones you mentioned, such as inflammation due to processed foods, certain oils, and more that are common in industrialized medicine. Plenty of anecdata of people who stopped eating certain categories of food and certain conditions they had for a long time went away. In my son's case, a severe case of eczema that persisted for years went away in a matter of weeks after we…

A lot of this largely is not true. People think that paleothic humans ate a lot of meat - they did not. They ate very little meat, we eat the most meat we’ve ever eaten now. And the meat they did eat was lean game meat. It was high in unsaturated fats - like our modern day oils. Not like a steak. A steak is a product of farming. It’s a new invention, Yes oils are “refined”, but humans have been eating unsaturated oil…

No idea where you're getting this from. The paleolithic was during an ice age full of big fatty game like sloths, mammoths, and so on. Some believe we hunted these animals to the point of extinction with a tiny population, which would imply a very high level, arguably unbelievably high, of consumption of meat. Even if we didn't hunt them to extinction we certainly did engage in relatively large scale hunting and consumption of vast quantities of them, which already largely falsifies your concept.

Meat only became more of a luxury in the agricultural age where we started squeezing more and more people into smaller and smaller regions which meant there was no longer enough to go around. So plebs got the carbs, and royalty got the protein. FWIW you can also see this in the groups that have ancient traditions dating back far into the past, like the various tribal groups in Russia, Mongolian nomads, etc. Meat, and many highly creative ways of preserving it [1], remain the majority of their diet. They probably don't date back to the paleo, but at least far back enough to falsify the claim that animal fats are even remotely novel.

[1] - https://www.rbth.com/russian-kitchen/334150-dish-kill-kopalk...

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#296

Post by sizzle »

phil21 wrote: post #282
antinomicus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m on tirzepatide right now from Eli lily, and I’ve been very interested in Reta, but I can’t say that I jump at the chance to inject something into myself that hasn’t been tested directly on the actual thing I’m about to put into my body. I know there are testing companies that will test certain sources but it’s not like they’ve tested the vial you get. If there’s some kind of pathogen or bacteria or whatever in th…

> I know there are testing companies that will test certain sources but it’s not like they’ve tested the vial you get. It's why you order a decent amount of it (e.g. 2 years supply, it lasts forever in a freezer) and pay for your own randomized testing of the batch you got. You go direct to the source, not via the middle men selling it for 10x markup on a per-vial basis. Certainly not perfect, and it adds significant…

It causes less muscle loss/wasting which is a huge benefit over Tirz.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#297

Post by sizzle »

stephbook wrote: post #164
declan_roberts wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a common and very acceptable concern and there's not great answers for it. Mostly a place will do multi-vail testing for purity, sterility, endotoxin and heavy metals. The idea is that the sample is sufficient to show safety. Many are rightfully dubious of this but still thousand and thousands of people taking it.

I'm using reta myself, but honestly it's because sema/tirz isn't allowed for me either. If you have medical tirz available, you should have some serious reasons to jump into the unregulated shark tank.

How has it been treating you? Do you keep muscle mass without having to hit 1g/lb of protein intake daily?

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#298

Post by procaryote »

throwaway82931 wrote: post #110
londons_explore wrote: post #23

So has anyone managed to separate the effects of semaglutide from the effects of weight loss? If this is caused by the weight loss, it is a little disappointing that public health didn't act quicker - lots of people have been overweight for a century now, so literally 10's of millions of people could have been saved from dementia had action been taken 100 years ago.

All my immediate family members are obese. I'm not (BMI 24.5, borderline overweight at the high end of normal, highest lifetime BMI was 29.5), but that's through strenuous, exhausting effort over decades. I also exercise regularly, though I've learned over time how disconnected exercise is from weight management. At my weight, I'm not a candidate for going on a GLP-1. I'm sure I could find an unethical doctor to pres…

Why wait?

If you feel unable to fix your diet without it, and you think it's safer to get on it, why not make it happen?

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#299

Post by krustyburger »

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.

Bodybuilding, eh? That makes you vastly more likely to believe in bro-science.

Re: Semaglutide linked to lower predicted dementia risk

#300

Post by simianparrot »

OptionOfT wrote: post #158
cthalupa wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So has anyone managed to separate the effects of semaglutide from the effects of weight loss? In general? Yes. For this specific thing? We haven't even really shown the effects matter for humans. > If this is caused by the weight loss, it is a little disappointing that public health didn't act quicker - lots of people have been overweight for a century now, so literally 10's of millions of people could have been sa…

We're too soft on companies, but equally too hard on people who have a food addiction.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN