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

511–520 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#511

Post by sjw987 »

dan-robertson wrote: post #505
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?

It's an important discussion. We should all be aiming to do better. Instead we're just lowering the standards for everything.

Only the morbidly obese should be using these drugs to get down to a healthy enough (overweight) level to lose the rest with sensible discipline, healthy/less eating (mostly this), and exercise (less this, but important for the mind, strength and cardio).

Discipline and basic understanding of nutrition and fitness are important life skills. At some point everybody should be developing them. If people can't be arsed doing that and we give easy shortcuts for everything in life, what's the point in being alive?

This argument comes up time and time again because it's common sense, yet people always seem to want to ignore it because deep down they are being lazy and undisciplined.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#512

Post by skeezyboy »

eru wrote: post #463
notpushkin wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically, nicotine can be classified as a stimulant: https://web.archive.org/web/20250712041104/https://psychonau...

It's not a straight-up stimulant. It's complicated.

cognitive stimulant definitely

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#513

Post by skeezyboy »

radiofreeeuropa wrote: post #58
jjice wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was kind of scared of these when Ozempic starting picking of steam for weight loss. I was worried that this would be having more negative effects. Turns out, generally speaking, if used with you doctor, these things are pretty safe, especially comparatively to some of the negatives of being overweight. And then I saw some of the stories on HN about how it's changed peoples lives for the better. And then people in m…

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…

> It's great because we had no other way to address this problem at a population level. Not any realistic ones, anyway.

um, go out and exercise? compared to your ancestors from a century ago, you live a relative life of luxury. THIS IS WHY YOU ARE FAT. Too much food in, not enough burning calories. So simple. Im sure there are people who are clinically fat, broken metabolism, but there are tens of millions of obese in the USA alone, are they all metabollically disabled? I doubt it

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#514

Post by komali2 »

skeezyboy wrote: post #510
otikik wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Because it isn't, so oh well.

I'm continually frustrated with the four thousand year old history of people being surprised that other people "don't just ${something good for you} and don't just stop ${something bad for you}." Great, we've tried the "Acting surprised people do unhealthy or bad things" strategy and the "scolding people for doing unhealthy things" strategy for a couple millennia and people still do the things.

Will we continue this strategy or will we try something else now?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#515

Post by bootsmann »

freehorse wrote: post #428
mbac32768 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The skepticism people have towards metabolic dysregulation models of obesity is too much. We know for a fact the inverse happens: girl starves herself for years to slim down to become a ballerina, eventually decides it's not worth it and tries to stop being so dangerously thin and... can't. She never feels hungry. Every time she eats she can only stomach a few bites before pushing it away. Just eat ice cream? Instant…

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.

As someone in the same boat, what worked for me is to replace ingredients with higher calorie versions. A significant one is replacing milk in recipes (polenta, mashed potatoes etc.) with heavy cream, this provides a good 500 calories boost on the same portion of food. Also adding sugar here and there to recipes that allow it without ruining taste.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#516

Post by fnord77 »

strken wrote: post #358
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.

"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…

"no free lunch" usually boils down to violating some law of thermodynamics.

since we're preventing the body from adding excess potential energy to the system, I don't think this is violating any no-free-lunch rules.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#517

Post by aerhardt »

Llamamoe wrote: post #452
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.

Honestly, this is essentially BS. I'd say that 95% of healthy weight people stay that weight because their metabolism and appetite works properly. People who stay in shape by paying careful attention to their diet are a tiny minority.

Where I live (Spain) there’s a massive intergenerational gap between how our parents ate and how we eat and exercise. A huge number of people around me go to great lengths to control what they eat and make an effort to move. I see it at the beach, at the restaurant or at the gym. You can ask anyone in the older generations if younger people are physically healthier and you’d find an almost unanimous yes. Coincidentally we have one of the highest life expectancies in the world. None of this is given.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#518

Post by komali2 »

boredhedgehog wrote: post #462
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.

That's only relevant if socialized medicine forces you to pay for the moral failures of other people, though. Spending your own money to feel better is widely accepted behavior.

Socialized medicine forces you to pay for the victims of drunk driving accidents, for when people shoot themselves in the hand with a nail gun, for the hospital bills of vaccine deniers ending up in the emergency room, for....

At some point I think you just have to accept that the whole point of socialized medicine is to just make sure people get healthcare regardless. If you want to engage in some kind of market analysis and means testing, you can always live in America, where it's guaranteed that people get exactly as much healthcare as they deserve, since net worth and liquid cash is correlated perfectly with an individual's moral success.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#519

Post by kashunstva »

benchly wrote: post #459
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, 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…

> The body is a marvelous machine, but it is far from a perfect or intelligent design.

And I think that we can only expect the process of evolution through natural selection to operate on traits that cause differential survival of individuals before reproduction. All sorts of new traits acquired through random mutation and recombination that only affect individuals after typical reproductive years will exist even while natural selection is still operating. The answer to “why doesn’t the human body operate like [some idealized state]?” Is either 1) insufficient time has elapsed to allow natural selection to change the gene pool, or 2) It doesn’t affect survival before or during reproductive years. (Or, I suppose a third explanation is that the required mutation that drives the change just hasn’t happened yet. Our species hasn’t been around that long after all!)

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#520

Post by theshackleford »

zoeysmithe wrote: post #104
qgin wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were even people who felt this way about anesthesia too. To survive in that era, they had to believe that suffering was somehow good for healing (or at least good spiritually) and talked about anesthesia as if it were cheating the natural god-given order.

I think this might be revisionism. A lot of people feared early anesthesia because it was far more dangerous than today. I also notice people will make note that 'eccentrics' from the 1940s-1950s hated air conditioning but it helps to understand it was a dangerous technology that regularly injured and killed people back then, especially in its earlier days the adults of that period were children during. AC didn't get…

> because full anesthesia does regularly injure, disable, and kill people

Disability or death are both incredibly rare side effects in modern usage and do not at all fit any pattern you could attach to the word “regular.”

Post reply on HN