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

711–720 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#711

Post by Nesco »

nkmnz wrote: post #560
Nesco wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure uncouplers will make a come back. Just something a little more targeted and safer than good ol’ DNP

looking for this, hu? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HU6

Yes, but also BAM15 and mRNA based UCPs overexpression

Longer term if it works more research in the domain, including variations of the other well known ones (DNP, XCT-790, mitoCCCP, …)

I firmly believe that combined with:

- additional progress on the current targets (GLP-1, GIP, …)

- compounds to counteracts muscle loss like myostatin inhibitors

- food options being shaped by more health conscious consumers

Having a slow metabolism will stop being an disadvantage by midcentury

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#712

Post by lo_zamoyski »

guerrilla wrote: post #575
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the source of difficulty in your case? Are you comparing your situation to that of someone with a predisposition for alcoholism?

No, it's far more difficult than quitting addictive drugs. I've done that and succeded several times over.

So you accept it as a behavioral problem, yes? I.e., an inability to refrain from overeating? Any speculation about why you cannot deny yourself?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#713

Post by gmadsen »

vidarh wrote: post #613
gmadsen wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

having the understanding of the science and self motivated enough to make lifestyle changes already puts you a couple standard deviations out of the population average, such that I don't really think its helpful as a comparison or something to model after

The science is clear that people who do make changes and achieve initial results are still overwhelmingly likely to fail at maintaining the results . Lots of people successfully make changes and lose weight, but exceedingly few manage to keep it low over time.

you are misunderstanding my point. There is a selection bias. Those with the reading comprehension and scientific aptitude to make a statement like "the science is clear" with accuracy and confidence is already exceedingly rare.

My assertion is that the success of long term weight changes is not independent from that variable.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#714

Post by phil21 »

shlant wrote: post #667
lm28469 wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is that we designed a system in which a majority of people cannot thrive and in which a lot of people end up developing problems like obesity or being labeled as ADHD. Now the same system designed a cure, one that you have to pay for and take for years if not for life, just so that you can rewire your perfectly normal brain to fit in the very imperfect mold of what the system needs Taking antidepressant won…

know what makes it easier to fix/change your environment? when you aren't obese and everything in life is so much harder. Guess what? you can both take ozempic AND fix the problems that caused the need to self-medicate with food (for example). In fact, I would be willing to bet that we see research coming out in the next couple years that shows people who lose weight with GLP-1's then go on to make better lifestyle c…

Definitely how it worked for me. At least so far.

I went from about 265lbs down to 160lbs at my lowest. I crashed it as quickly as I could over the course of about 4-5 months, because that’s how my brain works. Single goals with a hard metric to optimize.

During that I forced myself to start walking. 6k steps a day to begin with, ramping up to 20k steps a day at my peak. Not optional and no exceptions for any reasons. If it was 11:30pm and I was at 9k for the day, I got out of bed and walked until I hit my 20k goal.

Very difficult at first but eventually it just became a new habit. Having a dog that demands at least 5 miles of walks a day helped a lot!

After I dropped the weight I knew my strength was now an issue. Zero way to drop over 100lbs that quickly without losing muscle mass. So I started going to the gym towards the last couple months of that. I literally just sat in the hottub or did some really lazy laps in the pool since I enjoy that. The point was forcing myself to go on my scheduled “gym days”.

After I got out of severe calorie deficit territory I got a personal trainer twice a week to force myself to go with some social and financial pressure, and slowly learned how to do weight training. This was terrifying to me due to social anxiety, so I left it as my last item to work on.

I’m now back to 200lbs or so, but with an estimated 12% body fat composition. Roughly where I want to be, and just short of some “fun” strength goals like hitting a certain bench or squat target and staying there.

So far after over a year of being largely off the GLP-1s these habits have stuck. They still are not easy, but knowing how much impact they have just on my mental health when I am consistent with them keeps it going. Plus I made a few new unexpected friends along the way who give light social pressure to keep the gains coming.

My path is certainly not for everyone, but there would have been zero way for me to accomplish it and stick to it without the weight loss drugs. I’m now 44 years old, and a few of my friends have commented that this is the most unexpected thing they have seen me accomplish - and I like to think I’ve accomplished quite a bit throughout my life so far. A complete 180 from how I approached my physical health in the past, and the drugs gave me the performance enhancement for my diet that I needed to get over the hump.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#715

Post by tomxor »

RataNova wrote: post #422
pitpatagain wrote: post #11

This is specifically a study on people with HIV-associated lipohypertrophy, which is associated with accelerated aging. Not clear what this would mean for people generally.

The underlying mechanisms (reduced inflammation, improved fat distribution, better metabolic health) aren't unique to that group

> The underlying mechanisms (reduced inflammation, improved fat distribution, better metabolic health) aren't unique to that group

Those are causes, you can't just invert it (again) and call them mechanisms for anti-aging... Those things are side effects of obesity and diseases causing obesity, there is no evidence or reasonable basis here to suggest there would be any "anti-aging" effect in healthy people without those problems.

Similarly "Ozempic shows anti-gravity effect in humans!#11"... assuming you have unhealthy excess fat to lose.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#716

Post by phil21 »

jonathan_h wrote: post #606
xienze wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't try to tell me I failed because of a lack of effort, understanding, exercise, "discipline", etc. Not to be _too_ rude here, but clearly you missed the mark on at least one of those things. If you're burning more energy than you're consuming, it's impossible to not lose weight. Maybe you underestimated how many calories you were consuming, overestimated how many calories you were burning, didn't do it often en…

The missing piece is that the body does not burn a constant amount of energy, and often the body's response to calorie restriction is to reduce the amount of energy used. [1] Play the weight-loss game with your body, and you'll find the goalposts get moved. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9036397/

Metabolic adaptation is a rounding error. It’s not worth talking about in the context of losing weight if you are starting off as obese.

It’s effectively pseudoscience in the context of these discussions.

The simple fact you use less calories to move less mass is far more of a consequential variable many people forget to account for.

Go for a walk wearing a 100lb weighted vest and the try it without one and the impact will be exceedingly clear.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#717

Post by sumeno »

ifyoubuildit wrote: post #683
sumeno wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If not having cancer is so great why don't our bodies just not make cancer cells? Weight loss aids are given far more scrutiny because people wrongly view it as a moral failing

As I understand it, species that are really good at healing from injuries are more likely to develop cancer. So evolution has to optimize for survival via healing vs survival via not getting cancer. Some people probably do come at it from the moral angle. But there are good reasons to assume that this time isn't different, that there is indeed no free lunch. Thankfully, everyone is free to make that risk assessment t…

It seems like you really missed the point. Of course there are reasons we still get cancer, just like there are reasons people get fat. Evolutionarily people are way more likely to die of being under nourished than over, so the body packs on fat when it can. Evolution did not optimize for 2025

> Some people probably do come at it from the moral angle. But there are good reasons to assume that this time isn't different, that there is indeed no free lunch.

I'm struggling to understand what these sentences even mean. A medication may have side effects? Like every single medication we take? Yeah, of course it might. We don't have threads clutching their pearls about most medicines though. Tylenol can easily kill you if abused, but we don't have threads talking about how there's "no free lunch" for people using Tylenol responsibly.

> Thankfully, everyone is free to make that risk assessment themselves. Just don't start trying to force it on anyone.

Who is saying anything about forcing something on you? Is someone trying to force you to take Ozempic?

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#718

Post by kjkjadksj »

cthalupa wrote: post #637
wongarsu wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet women have a longer lifespan despite shorter reproductive years. If in a hunter-gatherer society most people stop reproducing after 40 (not entirely realistic, but bear with me), me being alive and fit at 45 can still improve the survival of my genepool. I can hunt meat and gather plants to make sure my children and grand-children are well-fed and able to produce plenty of offspring, carrying my genes on. I can b…

But you also take up resources, continue to decline physically, etc. We know that there is strong selection pressure for things that occur during reproductive years. No one debates this. How much the sort of scenarios you're discussing impact selection pressure is significantly less clear. But it's also a moot point for this discussion - we haven't been in a world where people can get this fat so easily and in such l…

Grandparents are a selective advantage well after reproduction. Older members of the tribe can watch the young while fitter members engage in hunting and foraging. They can also teach the young. Most tribes around the world that still exist you see this pattern.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#719

Post by rglover »

gtr wrote: post #482
rglover wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, we are at a point where people are overweight enough that getting exercise has its own risks, and taking a medication that allows you to be more active is likely to cancel out some of those downsides. And yet we rarely ask or say "maybe I should just eat fewer calories?" Unless you have some other disorder that prevents normal bodily function, that does work (and would be viable I'd imagine for the major…

As someone who has been fat and not-fat throughout my life, I think literally everyone knows that it is simple to lose weight by eating fewer calories. That does not mean it is easy. If you are already fat, which can happen almost without you noticing by eating 200-300 calories too much a day over a year say, or as a result of some brain malfunction (both have happened to me), then eating the calorie deficit require…

I've been fat/not-fat my whole life too. I'm fat right now (working too much and not watching diet).

> That does not mean it is easy. If you are already fat, which can happen almost without you noticing by eating 200-300 calories too much a day over a year say, or as a result of some brain malfunction (both have happened to me), then eating the calorie deficit require to lose weight is mentally very hard to to.

You install an app. You honestly track what you eat. Set a goal for how many calories per day. Done.

I've intentionally set my calories at 1,300 per day. Low, yes, but I allow myself to eat over that to satiation. The end result is that I'm still in a deficit relative to my actual caloric needs (e.g., maybe I eat 300-500 extra calories and my daily total rounds out around 1600-1800), so I lose weight.

I've started eating less and tracking calories and I'm losing weight (I'm not even exercising—I sit most of the day programming). Nothing extreme, just a simple mental hack.

I've done this before to the tune of losing 70-80 pounds. Literally just tracking calories and not even really exercising beyond walking. I wasted years on different workouts and diets all just to come back to realizing "yeah if you just eat less calories (and increase your intake of whole foods, not boxed slop), you lose weight."

Much better choice than shooting up with pharma syrup that has god knows what in it that's a ticking time bomb.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#720

Post by rglover »

eclipxe wrote: post #388
rglover wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, we are at a point where people are overweight enough that getting exercise has its own risks, and taking a medication that allows you to be more active is likely to cancel out some of those downsides. And yet we rarely ask or say "maybe I should just eat fewer calories?" Unless you have some other disorder that prevents normal bodily function, that does work (and would be viable I'd imagine for the major…

You think that is rarely asked?

In an honest way? Absolutely.

Most people suffer from severe self-delusion to avoid the mental pain of coming face to face with their shortcomings.

Post reply on HN