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

Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

ualberta.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 461 posts

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#451

Post by unshavedyak »

Kirby64 wrote: post #446
unshavedyak wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point of the discussion, imo. It seems to be an area of research. There's a lot of questions in my view. Why are people so addicted to food? Why do some models of caloric restriction not work as well as they should? How do we embed behavioral change, or do some of these people just have to be in misery for the rest of their lives? It's not a profound statement to say if you starve in a desert you'll lose w…

Again, food addiction and satiety is a different question than if CICO works. If you can't stop eating and cram too many calories because you eat too many... burgers and potato chips or whatever, that has nothing to do with if CICO works. I have yet to see evidence that shows that caloric restriction if properly, truly controlled, does not result in weight loss for the vast, vast majority of obese individuals. People…

> Again, food addiction and satiety is a different question than if CICO works.

Yes, and again - as i said previously. No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact. Talking about humans is the constructive conversion most people are having.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#452

Post by cthalupa »

brailsafe wrote: post #448
nightowl_games wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeff Nippard is a YouTuber, natural body building pro and record holder, and he takes about his bulk/cut cycle a lot. I don't know how you can so confidently say "No they don't" when it's literally impossible for you to make such a blanket statement.

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but if someone cited a YouTuber—particularly as their first qualifying attribute—as an authoritative source, I'd just laugh. While some YouTubers may be correct about the things they talk about, or may even be doctors or researchers, I think we're in a pretty sus world if disputes about factual or even anecdotal information can come down to whether someone's watching and getting…

I wouldn't cite him as a YouTuber first, but Jeff Nippard is a a reputable source. He's competed and won in natural bodybuilding competitions, set powerlifting records for his province, partnered with PhDs in the field for studies on hypertrophy (and is one of the people leading the charge on 'lengthened partials' as being one of the most efficient ways to build muscle, which the research does agree with.)

But yes, he is also popular on youtube.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#453

Post by Kirby64 »

unshavedyak wrote: post #451
Kirby64 wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, food addiction and satiety is a different question than if CICO works. If you can't stop eating and cram too many calories because you eat too many... burgers and potato chips or whatever, that has nothing to do with if CICO works. I have yet to see evidence that shows that caloric restriction if properly, truly controlled, does not result in weight loss for the vast, vast majority of obese individuals. People…

> Again, food addiction and satiety is a different question than if CICO works. Yes, and again - as i said previously. No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact. Talking about humans is the constructive conversion most people are having.

> No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact.

Other people are, in fact, questioning CICO. Look at the other commenter talking about base metabolism changes.

To put an analogy to this: Gambling addicts often lose lots of money at casinos. The behaviors that lead to them being addicted to gambling are in many ways likely equivalent to overeating problems. Nobody asks 'why are gambling addicts losing money?' because we know the reason (casinos have the house edge... you always lose on aggregate). And yet, with food, people consistently ask the question 'why are people so obese?' as if the answer isn't very obvious: they're eating too much food. It's purely as simple as that. The behaviors that lead to eating too much aren't nearly as focused on, in my opinion. Much time is spent on 'the kinds of foods eaten' and how specific things are bad for you, which is essentially like arguing that people should play more blackjack and less roulette or something.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#454

Post by 462436347 »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #384
462436347 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> addicted to HFCS HFCS consumption (along with added sugar consumption in general) peaked in 2000 and declined steadily until 2020: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38094768

It doesn't give me much confidence bringing it up at all in this convo. As if replacing HFCS with cane sugar (55% vs 50% fructose) changes anything about junk food.

Consumption of HFCS and added sugar are both down significantly since 2000, with the decline in the former driving the overall decline in the latter.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#455

Post by nightowl_games »

brailsafe wrote: post #448
nightowl_games wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeff Nippard is a YouTuber, natural body building pro and record holder, and he takes about his bulk/cut cycle a lot. I don't know how you can so confidently say "No they don't" when it's literally impossible for you to make such a blanket statement.

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but if someone cited a YouTuber—particularly as their first qualifying attribute—as an authoritative source, I'd just laugh. While some YouTubers may be correct about the things they talk about, or may even be doctors or researchers, I think we're in a pretty sus world if disputes about factual or even anecdotal information can come down to whether someone's watching and getting…

You're right. You dont have a dog in this fight.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#456

Post by unshavedyak »

Kirby64 wrote: post #453
unshavedyak wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Again, food addiction and satiety is a different question than if CICO works. Yes, and again - as i said previously. No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact. Talking about humans is the constructive conversion most people are having.

> No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact. Other people are, in fact, questioning CICO. Look at the other commenter talking about base metabolism changes. To put an analogy to this: Gambling addicts often lose lots of money at casinos. The behaviors that lead to them being addicted to gambling are in many ways li…

> Other people are, in fact, questioning CICO. Look at the other commenter talking about base metabolism changes.

I disagree. CICO is fundamental physics. Just because metabolism changes does not mean you can produce more energy than you take in. CICO always applies, and it's so 'duh' that it's nearly pointless to discuss in my mind.

Their points about metabolism changes is that the details matter. Finding a way to break the cycle will yield more gains with the population than telling people to starve in a desert.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#457

Post by Kirby64 »

unshavedyak wrote: post #456
Kirby64 wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one is questioning if CICO works. That's like if questioning if physics works. No one is doing that. The laws of the universe are still intact. Other people are, in fact, questioning CICO. Look at the other commenter talking about base metabolism changes. To put an analogy to this: Gambling addicts often lose lots of money at casinos. The behaviors that lead to them being addicted to gambling are in many ways li…

> Other people are, in fact, questioning CICO. Look at the other commenter talking about base metabolism changes. I disagree. CICO is fundamental physics. Just because metabolism changes does not mean you can produce more energy than you take in. CICO always applies, and it's so 'duh' that it's nearly pointless to discuss in my mind. Their points about metabolism changes is that the details matter. Finding a way to b…

Metabolism changes are metabolism changes. What does the food you eat have anything to do with that, in practice? As far as I can tell, the mix of carbs/fat/protein has little to do with how much your body “compensates” from a surplus/deficit. If you don’t meaningfully have control over that, the only other real lever is how many calories you eat. Finding a way to lower calories without satiety problems or food noise issues ultimately is the solution. Some people do it via lots of low caloric foods (veg, mainly) that still have high satiety. Some people do it with Ozempic. Some people just aren’t bothered nearly as much by a caloric deficit no matter what they eat.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#458

Post by brailsafe »

cthalupa wrote: post #452
brailsafe wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but if someone cited a YouTuber—particularly as their first qualifying attribute—as an authoritative source, I'd just laugh. While some YouTubers may be correct about the things they talk about, or may even be doctors or researchers, I think we're in a pretty sus world if disputes about factual or even anecdotal information can come down to whether someone's watching and getting…

I wouldn't cite him as a YouTuber first, but Jeff Nippard is a a reputable source. He's competed and won in natural bodybuilding competitions, set powerlifting records for his province, partnered with PhDs in the field for studies on hypertrophy (and is one of the people leading the charge on 'lengthened partials' as being one of the most efficient ways to build muscle, which the research does agree with.) But yes, h…

He seems like a reputable guy, and everything you mentioned is all probably best case scenario for someone who's not in a regulated profession or who's job it is to produce credible research. I'm not disputing that or him or any of his records (though incidentally it seems like his 1st place wins were in provinces with the fewest people), and I tend to enjoy his content. He also seems to have a bachelor's in biochem, also great, I don't.

I also like a bunch of other channels and have derived what feels like good information from them, I'd recommend them on that basis to people I felt would find it useful or entertaining. Just because I wouldn't cite them as an authoritative source doesn't mean it's a strike against them, it just means I don't think it's fair to tell someone they're wrong because my favorite YouTuber, even if they seem credible, well-natured, and are worth recommending, says X.

There are plenty out there doing good by their viewers and I love that, especially Canadian ones, but it's insufficient for being hyperbolic, imo, about what's impossible to make a claim about, and I don't think arguments from apparent authority are to be encouraged anyway.

In some cases, I've checked the advice of other MD content producers against real practitioners, and they've gave me the thumbs up in terms of credibility, and that obviously changes the vibe a bit, but still I'd hesitate to go too far with that, there's a lot people will do for money and attention.

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#459

Post by omegaworks »

lenerdenator wrote: post #383
omegaworks wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a tax on unhealthy food to help fund Medicare and Medicaid. Fully 13% of the population lives in an area with restricted access to grocery stores[1]. Couple that with car-centric anti-pedestrian development[2] and you have a definitively societal problem. Addressing that with taxes on the individual will not address these causes, only shift the burden further onto the poor. 1. https://www.aecf.org/blog/communities-…

Then fund the stores through the Medicaid funds generated. Gotta start somewhere.

State-run grocery stores[1] are where changes are actually starting.

https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press...

Re: Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

#460

Post by brailsafe »

nightowl_games wrote: post #455
brailsafe wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but if someone cited a YouTuber—particularly as their first qualifying attribute—as an authoritative source, I'd just laugh. While some YouTubers may be correct about the things they talk about, or may even be doctors or researchers, I think we're in a pretty sus world if disputes about factual or even anecdotal information can come down to whether someone's watching and getting…

You're right. You dont have a dog in this fight.

Thank you for your contribution
Post reply on HN