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

581–590 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#581

Post by gniv »

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…

This blog post by Derek Thompson answered a lot of questions for me: https://www.derekthompson.org/p/why-does-it-seem-like-glp-1-...

In particular it seems Ozempic has anti-inflamatory effects which could explain a lot of these non-weight-loss-related results.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#582

Post by checkyoursudo »

aerhardt wrote: post #517
Llamamoe wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Coincidental…

I am not sure I would rely on observations of gyms and beaches for whether people are healthier for fear of selection bias. Going to the beach and seeing mostly fit bathers is like going to the hospital and seeing mostly sick people and thinking that can be generalized to society.

Why would you ask old people if young people are healthier than they were? Surely, Spain compiles medical statistics.

Anyway, Spain appears to have the same weight issues as everywhere else:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9105543/

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#583

Post by indymike »

skeezyboy wrote: post #508
WithinReason wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

For part of my life, I was extremely athletic, and after five kids, I did not have time for 6+ hours a day of exercise. Doing one hour per day seemed to do nothing to offset middle age metabolism combined with a high carbohydrate diet.

The interesting thing is that once I switched to a keto diet, my body mass changed and my health improved significantly for the better. The interesting thing is that the keto diet is actually higher calorie than the high carbohydrate one.

I suspect that telling people they need to exercise more is not helpful - most people will never be able to exercise at a level that will make a dent in their diet. A lot of people are eating 4,000+ calories a day of high carbohydrate diet burning 50-200 calories per hour. The math just doesn't work. The diet is where it is at.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#584

Post by indymike »

b800h wrote: post #427
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 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.

> merely go out and buy something to make themselves feel or look better.

I'm pretty sure there are benefits far beyond looking better.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#585

Post by BirAdam »

chilldsgn wrote: post #355
p1dda wrote: post #290

Please stop with these obvious pharma ads, nobody needs to take Ozempic! Change your lifestyle and most importantly: STOP EATING JUNK FOOD

It really puzzles me how people would just pop a pill instead of make some lifestyle changes. Maybe it's just my personality type, but it disturbs me how most people just want something quick and easy instead of doing the actual work and becoming overall better via a real learning journey by struggling through changing bad habits. But whatever, they do whatever works for them! I don't like pharma.

Addiction is quite real, and food companies turned it into an art. For some people, quitting an addiction is easy. For others, it’s super hard.

It’s easy to say “make better habits,” but at this point, Ozempic has likely saved more lives than AA.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#586

Post by jart »

Aurornis wrote: post #111
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…

> 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. I feel like I've seen and heard more of the opposite: The trend is to avoiding anything that might make someone feel blame for arriving in their situation. With obesity the trend is to blame some combination of "our food supply", trending science topics like microplastics or th…

If anything it vindicates those people's beliefs. If you've seen the way someone can take Ozempic and survive on a few mouthfuls of food each day, while exercising 30 minutes each day, and become much less fat, but still be fat, then you'd understand. When your endocrine system is that dysfunctional, you need to exercise about 4 hours a day to look normal, and for most people that simply isn't a realistic lifestyle change, especially when every cell in your body is telling you that you must hibernate to survive. This is something that rightfully should be treated as medical issue.

Why is it that the people who hate fat people, are the ones most opposed to the treatment that will give them the choice to not be fat? If you hate the obese so much, then do you really want to live in a world where the majority of people are obese? It's like burning down a city to be king of the ashes. Some people can only feel superior if others are suffering for it.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#587

Post by mapontosevenths »

neves wrote: post #265
mapontosevenths wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Further, Ozempic itself is nearly 10 now and some people have been on Exenatide for 20+ years continuously now. These drugs are not novel, or new and we absolutely know the long term health impact.

20 years isn't a lot of time

If the side effects are mild enough I don't notice for 20+ years, that's fine by me. I'll take it. Obesity had side effects that were killing me.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#588

Post by tomrod »

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…

> our bodies don't just produce more GLP-1

Dominant subgroups in a species are dominant because their parents survived that last set of pressures (external death inducements) at a higher rate than other subgroups -- but won't necessarily see the same results with the current set.

Even 90 years ago, there was significant loss of life due to famine, so selection was towards people who could efficiently gain and store calories in a biological Keynesian strategy. Now we have the opposite problem -- abundance of life-sustaining food produced for cheap but good quality food is expensive (in the US -- many other parts of the world have their quality food cheaper but I digress). So there hasn't been enough pressure (external-induced death) for GLP-1.

As a species with a remarkable ability to modify its environment to suit our purposes, body response to disease is just another thing to modify.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#589

Post by sarchertech »

Spooky23 wrote: post #314
sarchertech wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doctors don’t get paid for writing prescriptions. They don’t get kickbacks for writing prescriptions. A small subset of doctors are paid by pharmaceutical companies to run trials or provide expertise, but you can look that up since it’s publicly available information, and it’s not based on them prescribing you anything. At most a drug rep comes by and brings donuts or something to talk about their new drugs. Source w…

Huh? Drug reps have scorecards for the doctors they call on and throw perks at the top performers or influencers. It also depends on the speciality - dermatologists working for price equity mills are almost evaluated like salespeople. Source: girlfriend is a rep.

Yeah and what are those perks? Pens, t-shirts, backpacks, posters for patient rooms?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#590

Post by Fluorescence »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #446
strken wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have to check my sources but I'm pretty sure some of them have been prescribed for weight loss at various times. DNP and stimulants I'm more confident of, nicotine and tape worms I'm a bit iffy about.

Amphetamine is actually a very effective weight loss drug. And it's sort of orthogonal to the fact that it's a stimulant. Stimulants in general can cause an acute reduction in appetite and temporary weight loss. This tends to stabilise with tolerance, however. As someone with obesity and ADHD, thus was my experience with methylphenidate treatment. And I used to think the weight loss effects of amphetamine were analog…

> treatment for binge eating disorder

There is a mixed picture on this. I see a lot reports of reports of it causing binging in the evenings despite no prior issues.

The issue is that therapeutic doses are not the multi-day bender of a speed-freak that forgoes sleep to keep their blood-concentration permanently high. Instead it's a medicated window of 6-12 hours with a third or more of their waking hours remaining for rebound effects to unleash stimulation-seeking demons that run wilder than ever.

Post reply on HN