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

811–820 of 868 posts

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#811

Post by 71bw »

sumeno wrote: post #717
ifyoubuildit wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 differen…

  > Is someone trying to force you to take Ozempic?
A shocking amount of doctors in Poland nowadays.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#812

Post by cthalupa »

loeg wrote: post #797
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

But why? Ozempic et al solve the input end of the equation. Burning more and literally being warmer isn't better.

I would agree, personally - I won't go near DNP, and even the newer stuff like BAM15 that is supposed to be incredibly selective I am quite suspicious of.

But you still see people losing tons of weight on GLP-1s wanting it to go faster, drop more pounds, etc.

I'm a big proponent of them - and I have enough risk tolerance that I'm on grey market retatrutide - but I see a lot of people that want to just keep adding more and more chemicals to the equation to solve the issue. I've taken the time to significantly modify my food and exercise habits, and believe that I'll be able to maintain my weight loss if I were to go off of the GLP-1. But a lot of people haven't. They eat the same bad food, just in lower quantities, don't increase their protein and fiber intake, don't exercise, and just up the dose or add a new compound when their rate of weight loss doesn't satisfy them.

There's tons of interest in BAM15, clenbuterol, and all sorts of experimental substances. Tons of people taking things like tesamorelin and ipamorelin too.

I think the GLP-1s are basically miracle drugs that have allowed a lot of people, including myself, to totally revamp their approaches to diet and fitness. But there's a lot of people that are going to be more than happy to increase their cocktail with anything they think will get them skinny faster.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#813

Post by cthalupa »

sjw987 wrote: post #537
guerrilla wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah man. I'm overweight and despite trying everything I possibly can for most of my adult life, I still can't win. I do everything you're supposed to do but it's just not possible to maintain long-term. It's a constant struggle. You don't have discipline. It's just easier for you. That's all. I still won't use this drug but don't try to tell me I failed because of a lack of effort, understanding, exercise, "disciplin…

You just haven't got there yet. You haven't failed. It really just comes down to eating less and healthier. Some people have metabolic differences either side, but they don't amount to a great deal. Weight loss drugs suppressing your appetite literally shows this to be true. You just need to do it yourself without the drug. Eventually you'd want to come off the drug, right? When that happens, you would need to do jus…

> Eventually you'd want to come off the drug, right? When that happens, you would need to do just this.

I've made enough changes to my lifestyle that I am confident I could come off the drug and maintain the lost weight. I've added weight lifting with the prospect of bodybuilding as a hobby. I'm likely going to need to take time off just to get enough calories in during periods when I am trying to add muscle because I won't want to eat enough otherwise.

But I'm not actually looking forward to that, because the list of positive effects from these medications that are independent of weight loss is quite long. I expect that short of any major detrimental side effect suddenly rearing it's head or gene editing or some other superior thing appearing, I'll be on these for life, regardless of weight.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#814

Post by cthalupa »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #712
guerrilla wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

For more than half of my life, I was quite skinny. I was not exhibiting any particularly strong willpower or self control. I never had to put forth any effort in not being fat. It was not a struggle, it was not a challenge, and it was not because I lacked a behavioral problem. Well into my 20s I had zero issue controlling my weight - though saying controlling my weight here is kind of a misnomer, since I put no thought or effort into it. If anything, when I was trying to get into powerlifting, I struggled to eat enough - I constantly felt sick trying to reach my calorie and protein targets.

Then circumstances changed. I swapped to an overnight job for more money. I started cooking less because of the hours, and eating more fast food. I stopped lifting weights because powerlifting was less interesting to me. My weight crept up little by little for years and years until I was overweight. And I realized my relationship with food had changed - ignoring physical hunger was still easy, but I was still constantly thinking about food. Slightly bored? Let's eat something. Work stressing me out? Grab some more food. Have a few minutes respite from everything? Eating sounds good. Eventually I was past overweight and into obese.

I managed to lose 30lb or so a few times, close to 50lb once. I could maintain it for a bit. But I was having to expend huge amounts of mental energy to do it - something I had never had to do before I had gotten fat in the first place. The second I had to prioritize other things in my life, for whatever reason, I no longer had the energy to spend so much time trying to push down all of the noise in my mind about food.

vs. just a decade prior, never really thinking about food at all. Is it possible for anyone to lose weight? Sure. Bodies aren't magic. Energy has to come from somewhere, and lower your calories a sufficient amount and you will lose weight. But for many people the amount of willpower and effort required is just massively different. The years of skinny me would not have lasted nearly as long as they did if I had the same level of food noise then that I do now.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#815

Post by otikik »

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?

Exercise is undoubtedly good and has many benefits. Unfortunately it's not a realistic way to lose weight for most people.

Our bodies are just too efficient. We can't "outrun the fork" (unless it's our full-time job). We must modify our diet. Which is not easy for many reasons.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#816

Post by chownie »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #777
const_cast wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm explaining why your claimed observation is bullshit. And, for the record, you haven't provided any evidence either. You're just "saying your observations". And, let's all be real here, skinny person to skinny person. Most skinny people are extraordinarily biased against ozempic because they lose moral high ground to people they dislike. I think a lot of skinny people want to desperately believe they are special o…

I'm not the same person you were responding to earlier? You seem rather emotionally wound up in all of this. Someone doesn't need "evidence" to say "I noticed A". The evidence is right there - they're claiming to have seen it. Among other things, you've put yourself in the position of claiming - but not arguing, because you provide no reasoning to engage with - that there are no black swans in the world. It's entirel…

> You seem rather emotionally wound up in all of this.

There is no reasonable response once you turn the conversation into this, please don't do that.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#817

Post by rscho »

cthalupa wrote: post #809
rscho wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ozempic is very recent. Given the volume of prescription, the probability of problematic side-effect in the short-to-medium term indeed seems low. But it sill is too early to say whether ozempic really isn't problematic. Let's hope so.

I really don't understand this skepticism around semaglutide and long-term effects. One, GLP-1s are not a new class of drug. We have had them in various forms for about two decades now. Two, the clinical trials have followed the standard sort of schedule as any other medication we release. I don't hear or see all the hand-wringing that these have received over every other medication we develop. Three, they are analog…

> silly unless your general stance is that you won't take any medication until that specific formulation has been on the market for decades

Yes, I'd argue that this is the default stance for many healthcare professionals.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#818

Post by JumpCrisscross »

a5c11 wrote: post #807
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obesity - symptom. Usually the illness is a bad diet, lack of movement, or very rarely some serious health condition The fact that it's treatable with a drug should have put this nonsense to bed. I don't gain weight when I eat more food. That occurs regardless of whether I'm exercising heavily or literally not leaving bed and ordering food via delivery. My basal metabolism takes care of my weight management. The fl…

> The fact that it's treatable with a drug should have put this nonsense to bed. You can "cure" brain tumour with painkillers too. That's the same thing - silencing symptoms, while the cause persists. > precisely measure their diet and exercise, gain a pound or two If they exercise, that's normal they gain weight. Muscles build up, the body keeps some more water - that's natural. Weight isn't the only measure, especi…

> can "cure" brain tumour with painkillers too. That's the same thing - silencing symptoms, while the cause persists

Bad comparison. Taking painkillers doesn’t cause the underlying condition to go away. GLP-1 agonists do. The obesity goes away. The inflammation goes away. Hell, the dietary choices get changed. In some cases, including ones I’ve personally seen multiple times now, even after treatment is stopped.

> If they exercise, that's normal they gain weight. Muscles build up

They’re not gaining a persistent few pounds of muscle in a week that then get worked off with exercise.

The next few generations of humanity are going to be genuinely fascinating. One group with fewer and fewer transmissible diseases, without obesity, aging slower. The other anti-vax, anti-medicine and whatnot.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#819

Post by elzbardico »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #26
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.

People on ozempic certainly look more like the crypt keeper than a younger version of themselves. You lose all that buccal fat that defines your young adult face.

Losing facial fat will only make you look older if your skin has low elasticity and/or if you lose too much fat, too much fast. Also, it is very common for people that start eating dramatically less to also reduce their water intake too much and become dehydrated.

Besides ensuring you're getting sufficient water, there are a lot of dermatologic procedures that can help you to recover at least some of your skin elasticity. And in more dramatic cases, there's a plethora of options, from fillers to lifting procedures.

Re: Ozempic shows anti-aging effects in trial

#820

Post by elzbardico »

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" is a heuristic, a useful one most of the time, just that.

But it is not a hard nature law such as the speed of light in vacuum.

Post reply on HN