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

Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

trial.medpath.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#151

Post by throwawaylaptop »

leidenfrost wrote: post #126
kulahan wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many people confuse simple with easy. It IS simple to reduce your weight. There are like, two things you need to do. It is, however, VERY hard to actually do those things.

But it's not. What you're referring to, is the basic concept of thermodynamic calorie in/calorie out. Yes, you can "just" reduce food and lose weight if you hit deficit numbers. But if you don't do it correctly, you'll feel like trash, you'll suffer bad cravings, and put yourself in a stressful mental situation for days, possibly putting your job at risk. You have to: - Eat less than what you're already eating - But…

Inaccurate in my opinion. Let's say you eat 2500 calories a day usually. But you want to lose weight so you reduce it to 1800.

Except your calories are from pop tarts.

If you ate 100 calories of pop tarts every hour you're awake for total of 1800 calories... At the end of the month you'd be fatter.

If you ate 1800 calories of pop tarts once a day in 1 hour, you might maintain weight or loose a little. Maybe.

If you had 3600 calories of pop tarts in a few hour window, and then didn't eat again for 48 hours, you'd lose weight in a month.

Insulin control is 99% of losing weight. Yes thermodynamic blah blah, but unless you pay attention to hormone control that controls metabolism in general, it's not going to work without insane willpower to keep your 'calories out' higher than your body wants.

If you repeated the 3600 calories every 48 hours with beef instead, you'd lose weight like never before.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#152

Post by smt88 »

genewitch wrote: post #113
smt88 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of miraculous, life-saving drugs that have minimal side effects and aren't snake oil. Metformin, insulin, many vaccines, some statins, and some antibiotics are clearly on that list.

> panacea or cure-all specifically, is what i said.

"GLP-1s are beneficial for many conditions downstream of liver dysfunction and metabolic disease" is a much milder claim than "cure-all".

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#153

Post by noah_buddy »

falcor84 wrote: post #102
noah_buddy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people (will only speak to America), view being fat as a literal moral failing. Gluttony or overeating are not the sin, but being fat. (From that perspective:)a miracle cure that allows someone to stop being fat is like an indulgence (in the Roman Catholic sense). It’s a cheat, a shortcut that allows the unworthy to reach a state they do not deserve. My opinion is to wait long enough to validate there are no lon…

I'm not a Catholic, but wasn't the idea of an indulgence that God intentionally allowed an alternative path to redemption, such that if you buy an indulgence, you are (at least by their definition) worthy and deserving? I always thought of this as essentially the same idea as with Civ allowing you different paths to victory.

My point was that many people view ozempic and other drugs like Martin Luther viewed buying an indulgence: a cheat for the undeserving.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#154

Post by ninwa »

hinkley wrote: post #124
some_random wrote: post #15

I find it fascinating how much a pretty large group of people just hate semaglutides and seemingly need to believe that it's some kind of Faustian bargain. I'm not talking about the people who are cautious or suspicious, that's more than reasonable, but it's clear that it's not cautious optimism in many.

You've got a crowd of people raised in a Calvinist society who think nothing good comes without suffering, you've got people who feel this is a cheat where discipline should win out, and you have a bunch of people who are used to all easy solutions coming with either a bad lottery ticket or externalities on other people/the environment. They can all agree that they're waiting for the other shoe to drop. That said, we…

> I would prefer if we figured out what other than cultural changes is making everyone have symptoms of inflammatory dysfunctions.

I personally hope it's just cultural and sugar/hfcs. Because some alternatives might be grim to reckon with just from a humanistic/grief perspective: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34484127/

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#155

Post by snug »

angmarsbane wrote: post #94
kjkjadksj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People on ozempic certainly look more like the crypt keeper than a younger version of themselves. You lose all that buccal fat that defines your young adult face.

I notice it in people who have never been the weight that they're suddenly walking around as, with them it often looks overdone, too thin for their features etc, but in those who have used it to get back to weights where I've seen them before...I didn't guess. They had to tell me.

I've lost weight the natural way and people will tell me the same thing. People are just rude to fat people

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#156

Post by aswegs8 »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #44
morninglight wrote: post #8

There is another study that comes to mind. https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2420092122

I have no idea why you're down voted. The replication crisis is real, and it is well known that fraud is a part of it

Maybe because that is a whole different topic that is only tangentially related to this thread?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#157

Post by XorNot »

throwawaylaptop wrote: post #142
radiofreeeuropa wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's great because we had no other way to address this problem at a population level. Not any realistic ones, anyway. Like, I figured we were just never going to solve it, given the two possibilities were "radically re-engineer US culture such that moving to the US doesn't make previously-skinny people fatter" (with other countries heading the same direction as us needing to make similar moves, one supposes) or "find…

I helped my dad lose 50 lbs by finally, after 10 years, getting him to give up bread, sugar, potatoes. It took buying him 2 months of a bluetooth glucose monitor. Once he saw what certain foods do, he believed me finally. At 65 years old, healthier than I remember since he was 40 and I was a teen. It doesn't require some weird injection.

No but its a lot easier for people who've had trouble and gets results, which is all that matters.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#158

Post by pessimizer »

const_cast wrote: post #99
morkalork wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even then, limiting calorie intake isn't all that difficult; there's a reason why intermittent fasting took off and so many people were getting results from it.

Ive heard this same sentence, verbatim, repeated throughout the course of decades for particular fad diets. Decades .

The irony is that all that

"it's so easy"

"it's just calories in, calories out"

"if you eat according to this plan and make sure to get 8 hours of sleep a day, you won't even feel the cravings"

Is stuff that fat people say. They totally buy into it and buy all of the products to help them convince themselves this is true. Then they get disillusioned when it doesn't work, have a crisis of faith, then go to the next fad to get over the self-hatred caused by their failure at sticking to something so easy.

Intermittent fasting is great. It got me from 225 to 165, kept it off for the past few years with no effort (my entire metabolism recalibrated to 165-175, I guess.) I also know people who cry actual tears when they're very late for a meal, or panic. Those people need therapy and/or maybe an injection to artificially lower their appetites to the level where I also artificially lowered my own appetite.

Intermittent fasting is no more natural than injections. Dieting is modernity.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#159

Post by devmor »

jbentley1 wrote: post #16
some_random wrote: post #15

I find it fascinating how much a pretty large group of people just hate semaglutides and seemingly need to believe that it's some kind of Faustian bargain. I'm not talking about the people who are cautious or suspicious, that's more than reasonable, but it's clear that it's not cautious optimism in many.

Naturally skinny people hate Ozempic for the same reason I know many talented engineers who hate AI coding.

I think those engineers don’t like you because you find unrelated subjects to justify your favorite scam.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#160

Post by XorNot »

Aurornis wrote: post #118
cm2187 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And also the idea that it is "easy" to lose weight is completely out of touch. If it was there wouldn't be millions of people trying hard, spending money on trying and failing for decades, and entire businesses addressing that. RFK Jr's "let them eat less" is paradoxically the modern version of "let them eat cake"!

> And also the idea that it is "easy" to lose weight is completely out of touch. If it was there wouldn't be millions of people trying hard, spending money on trying and failing for decades, and entire businesses addressing that. This is a touchy topic, but I would like to point out that you're missing the obvious confirmation bias that comes with this observation. There are many people who modulate their weight by c…

With 40% of US adults overweight, that is a substantial plurality though. It's not confirmation bias when it's more then 1 in every 3 people.
Post reply on HN