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

Peptides: where to begin?

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 431 posts

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#271

Post by kelipso »

BoggleOhYeah wrote: post #263
simonklitj wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is HN particularly drawn to this over other platforms? I gotta say I don’t quite recognize this. In general, I think there’s a good dose of respect for science around these parts, but maybe I’m blind to it.

I see a particular strain more often here and in “rationalist”-adjacent spaces. It’s essentially anti-intellectualism dressed up as intellectual curiosity and debate.

Come on, just admit that you are not able to follow the debate instead of criticizing it from the outside without understanding it.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#272

Post by ses1984 »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #241
steveBK123 wrote: post #238

I think we are sort of in the worst of both worlds right now re: medicines/supplements/gray market. FDA approval is expensive slow process. Doctors train for a long time and then work 40+ years entire careers, some without a ton of continuing education. But then we have an entire gray market because enough legal and practical loopholes to drive a freight train through, such that people are self medicating with dubiou…

> some without a ton of continuing education. Where did you get this idea? I did a simple, five second Google search and learned that on average, US doctors are required to complete about 50 hours of continuing education for each one- to two-year recert cycle. (On HN, I also hear similar complaints about public school teachers. It isn't true. Public school teachers are required to do similar continuing education.)

Neither teachers nor administrators take continuing education seriously, in my local experience.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#273

Post by mft_ »

kelipso wrote: post #264
mft_ wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, but that’s not the point: many anti-vaxxers are against all vaccines, irrespective of how they were tested. (And will argue against e.g. the FRA approvals.)

But you confuse that set of people with people who don’t know want to inject untested vaccines into their body.

(I don’t)

I’m genuinely not aware of a DIY or grey market in vaccines. Peptides, yes, but vaccines?

In the absence of this, I suspect you’re either confused or straw-manning…

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#274

Post by staticassertion »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #242
staticassertion wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they're referring to the brief bit in the post that indicates that oral ingestion leads to a breakdown that makes oral supplements of amino acids pointless. They say it very briefly and they don't really outright assert it, it's just a sort of implied aside.

Here is the exact quote: > You’re not going to be taking these things orally... These mail-order peptides are injectable items. Every single YouTube video and blog post I have read about peptites is exclusively about injectable supplements.

That's not the exact quote lol you cut out the exact part I was referring to.

> because unless a really substantial amount of engineering has gone into it, any given peptide is going get the same treatment from your digestive system as a chicken breast does, i.e. a complete teardown

> Every single YouTube video and blog post I have read about peptites is exclusively about injectable supplements.

Collagen peptides, ghk-cu, and many other peptide supplements are often taken orally.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#275

Post by A_D_E_P_T »

oa335 wrote: post #260
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweeping statements in biochemistry must be made with caution. It is well known that there are some small peptides that are absorbed following oral administration. ...BPC-157 itself is said to be among this class. As are certain milk tripeptides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactotripeptides Interestingly enough, those two, as well as Gly-Pro-Hyp, are proline/hydroxyproline-rich, which might suggest that proline-ric…

> It is well known that there are some small peptides that are absorbed following oral administration. ...BPC-157 itself is said to be among this class Do you know of any studies that suggest BPC-157 absorption from gut?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jor.21107

Among others. If you read the paper, it's actually apparent that there's little difference between i.p. and oral administration in terms of efficacy -- both were roughly equally effective in improving MCL ligament healing.

Admittedly the paper's in rats -- as are 99% of the others -- as there's no incentive for anybody to run human trials.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#276

Post by staticassertion »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #248
staticassertion wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you hadn't lost any muscle mass, zero chance you're going to see the same exercise performance on a calorie deficit.

This is untrue. There are 100s of YouTube videos of amateur body builders preparing for a show. They are able to maintain their muscle mass while in a calorie deficit. Yes, it is insanely hard, but it can be done.

I didn't say that you can't maintain muscle mass. I'm saying your performance will suffer.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#277

Post by simmerup »

diath wrote: post #25
kibibu wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know dozens of people at my gym I don't think I even know dozens of people, full stop, let alone well enough to talk to them about their peptide use.

I go to a gym that has IFBB pros and people competing on elite powerlifting level, steroid and peptide use is an every day chit chat topic.

The group of people that seem to be dying in their 30s of heart failure then

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#279

Post by illusive4080 »

Reminds me of some family members, all about organic, no seed oils, no plastics, no using 5G, no EMF, no fillers, no preservatives, no stabilizers, no emulsifiers, etc.

And yet they use unhealthy amounts of avocado oil, consume unhealthy amounts of “good fats.” They discount caloric intake and solely focus on eating loads of what they consider to be good food.

Re: Peptides: where to begin?

#280

Post by Bender »

kube-system wrote: post #9
Bender wrote: post #3

It seems we are treating Peptides like drugs here. It's my opinion that amino acids regardless of how they are chained do not belong under and stricter regulation than food given I eat peptides every day from my food. Then again I do not believe in the concept of prescription drugs. Everything with a NDC code should be at the grocery store and I should be able to stock up on it without permission especially given how…

The regulation of drugs or most any consumer product is not due to the inherent danger of an item itself, but the danger presented to a consumer inside the context of societal mechanisms that influence behavior. You're right that many regulations don't make sense outside of a societal context -- but that's because they also don't exist outside of a societal context. The reason we don't need tight regulations on bleac…

The reason we don't need tight regulations on bleach is because we don't have a societal issue causing people to drink it and hurt themselves..

I think you missed out on a long time period of 4chan. They managed to get a number of people to mix ammonia and bleach.

Post reply on HN