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

501–510 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#501

Post by Telemakhos »

eru wrote: post #456
strken wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No free lunch" is a reasonable question to ask when evaluating medication, if it would improve the evolutionary fitness of the majority of people. I think this is behind some of the skepticism. If Ozempic is so great then how come our bodies don't just produce more GLP-1? How come we aren't like chimps, with eternally shredded bodies and cheese grater abs, provided we get the protein to support them? I would guess t…

> The second point I haven't seen discussed is that weight loss drugs prior to GLP-1 agonists include cigarettes, which (worst case) give you cancer; [...] Nicotine works just fine as an appetite suppressant without the carcinogenic tar you get from burning tobacco leaves. Similar for other stimulants or stimulant-like substances. But I agree that they get a bad reputation, despite actually working pretty well, and w…

Nicotine, even without the tar, reduces your nitric oxide levels leading to vasoconstriction, damages endothelial health, and can lead to atherosclerosis. You're much better off eating less and making more time to exercise instead of ingesting foreign substances to compensate for bad habits.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#502

Post by benchly »

wisty wrote: post #495
benchly wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Ozempic is so great, how come our bodies don't just... While I agree with your sentiment, your argument here assumes the human body always makes intelligent decisions for itself. My obstructive sleep apnea would like a word. After it's done choking me awake, of course. The body is a marvelous machine, but it is far from a perfect or intelligent design. We are lucky to have what we have, but expect operating mist…

Evolution should make intelligent choices for us but there's thousands years where a few extra pounds meant surviving a famine. Also I bet it will kill a few people with eating disorders. As long as you're in a 1st world country and have a BMI over ... maybe 25 (and aren't on steroids so you're both anorexic and overweight at the same time) I'd guess you're dodging a lot of the most obvious risks.

How do you define 'intelligent' and 'evolution?' I think we might differ on what those words mean, which would make this conversation difficult, so let's clarify where each of us is coming from.

My understanding (which may be slightly misguided because this is definitely not my field) is that Intelligence is the ability to use information for reasoning, decision making and achieving understanding. This ability, as a directed action, only applies to creatures with consciousness.

Regarding evolution, my understanding is closer to a process that is more akin to a passive filter, with no guidance to speak of unless we want to stretch the limits of the concept of guidance to encompass survival, which is the genetic materials of those who survive the environment getting passed on, which would also implies that sometimes garbage/noise stays in the gene pool. While information (genetic material) is being passed on, it is not being selected through reasoning or consideration, but more of a mechanical process (although there's an argument to be had that we, humans, might be changing that game).

How would you define those words? Happy to consider understanding different than my own, since I do find it interesting.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#503

Post by ap99 »

This, like much of the pharmaceutical approach to well-being, is treating symptoms and not the problem.

Metabolic dysfunction? Fix the metabolism.

Poor understanding of nutrition? Fix the understanding.

Lack of emotional or self-control? Fix the discipline.

Obesity is largely NOT an acute symptom and does not need an acute solution.

If you don't fix the underlying problem you will have weight issues your whole life (because it only gets worse with age).

And that means a lifelong ozempic customer.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#504

Post by zarzavat »

Llamamoe wrote: post #453
freehorse wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This concept would be hard to grasp for me if I did not know personally a person facing such issue. I don't think most people can understand that "just eat more" does not work in such cases, because most people can eat just fine even if not really hungry.

> because most people can eat just fine even if not really hungry. I literally cannot imagine how this is possible. Don't you feel full? Doesn't your body start refusing to swallow? Doesn't the food turn tasteless and start making you nauseous? 100-200kcal over your BMR, sure, but beyond that?

Hunger and satiation are two different neural pathways. Hunger is low blood sugar. Satiation is stretching of the stomach. You can still eat even with normal blood sugar if your stomach isn't full.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#505

Post by dan-robertson »

ap99 wrote: post #503

This, like much of the pharmaceutical approach to well-being, is treating symptoms and not the problem. Metabolic dysfunction? Fix the metabolism. Poor understanding of nutrition? Fix the understanding. Lack of emotional or self-control? Fix the discipline. Obesity is largely NOT an acute symptom and does not need an acute solution. If you don't fix the underlying problem you will have weight issues your whole life (…

Is it possible to avoid having the same discussion every time anything related to Ozempic comes up?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#506

Post by glp1guide »

gavinray wrote: post #491
glp1guide wrote: post #286

If you think Ozempic (Semaglutide) is good, Retatrutide is going to blow it out of the water: https://glp1.guide/content/a-new-glp1-retatrutide/ Currently the only people experimenting with it are the underground gray market peptide enthusiasts (you can find them on reddit and elsewhere), but the results are quite intense. [EDIT] Just to be clear, gray market Retatrutide is illegal, I'm not encouraging you to buy it…

I've used Retatrutide and wasn't that impressed I used 5mg/wk (Have used Semaglutide, Tirzepatide, and Retatrutide. For Sema/Tirz, I've had both RX and grey market.)

Interesting -- would love to hear anything more you have to share! The research numbers would suggest that Reta was top, results wise.

Any other significant differences you felt/noticed? Also, do you find Tirz to be an imiprovement over Sema?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#507

Post by skeezyboy »

throwup238 wrote: post #364
strken wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No free lunch" is a reasonable question to ask when evaluating medication, if it would improve the evolutionary fitness of the majority of people. I think this is behind some of the skepticism. If Ozempic is so great then how come our bodies don't just produce more GLP-1? How come we aren't like chimps, with eternally shredded bodies and cheese grater abs, provided we get the protein to support them? I would guess t…

> How come we aren't like chimps, with eternally shredded bodies and cheese grater abs, provided we get the protein to support them? There are several reasons: Chimps have a higher density of testosterone receptors with a higher sensitivity than humans. Compared to humans, they are essentially roided out all the time. Humans are also hairless endurance hunters so we naturally have much larger fat reserves (15-25% of…

> Humans are also hairless endurance hunters really? who said that? just one of many tactics we use. and obviously weve evolved to be good runners, we're bipedal. i imagine ostriches are similarly built for long distance running

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#508

Post by skeezyboy »

WithinReason wrote: post #431
strken wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No free lunch" is a reasonable question to ask when evaluating medication, if it would improve the evolutionary fitness of the majority of people. I think this is behind some of the skepticism. If Ozempic is so great then how come our bodies don't just produce more GLP-1? How come we aren't like chimps, with eternally shredded bodies and cheese grater abs, provided we get the protein to support them? I would guess t…

> If Ozempic is so great then how come our bodies don't just produce more GLP-1? To store calories so you don't starve. This is a failure mode of evolution and there is in fact "free lunch" when we use technology to reoptimise our bodies to calorie abundance

> when we use technology to reoptimise our bodies to calorie abundance

replace "calorie abundance" with "sedentary lifestyle" and youre there. its people eating more than they burn off because they dont exert themselves because thats what being an adult means.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#509

Post by reverendjames »

hollerith wrote: post #19
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.

The drug companies are very good at making new drugs with high profit potential look better than they are. I'm worried semaglutides are another fen-phen, Vioxx, Quaaludes, Trovafloxacin or OxyContin. One thing to watch for is effect size: how big of an anti-aging effect does Ozempic confer relative to other good interventions? Were the subjects doing other solid anti-aging interventions like the Fasting Mimicking Die…

Quaaludes should definitely make a comeback.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#510

Post by skeezyboy »

otikik wrote: post #454
b800h wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other side of this is related to morals. People learned self-discipline by having to moderate their diet. Replacing that challenge with an injection is another example of a world in which people are not challenged to grow as people, but merely go out and buy something to make themselves feel or look better.

There is another way to look at it. People who don't experience difficulties moderating their diet and could flounder their "self discipline" are now on a level field with people who did have difficulties with their diet. So they feel threatened by it. Another example of a world in which people are not challenged to grow as people; instead of being happy that more people can get healthy they dismiss the medical advan…

go out and get some exercise, run around, why is this never an option?
Post reply on HN