This doesn’t help as much as you think.
What does help:
- Banning all junk food from schools.
- Making physical education compulsory.
For kids, a combination of healthy food + activity will pretty much always do the trick.
Well, we do have an authoritarian in charge, so he could make it happen.
All that does is help slow down the problem in kids. Healthy school food sucks, and once kids can obtain junk food by their own means, they will skip the lunch and buy crap later. None of that is influencing a long term mind set.
This is not true. But I can see why you would think that if you lived in the US.
You honestly think that banning junk food from schools is a bad thing?
This already happens in many developed countries because its well known now just how bad that type of food is for children.
You can feed them junk food at home if that is your choice as a parent, but at school it should never be allowed.
1 Like
In any event, back to GLP-1s.
One additional beneficial effect that is being studied is their effect on addictions (alcohol, gambling etc).
They are studying much higher doses of GLP-1s (7.2mg for Semaglutide and 25mg for Tirzepatide) which in turn should have some effect on the worst cases of addictive behavior (alcohol especially).
It is a good thing.
It is also expensive.
Logistics, sir, logistics.
This discussion reminds me of the “ketchup as a vegetable” dustup from the 80’s
“People return to their baseline weight and lose all cardiometabolic benefits in less than 2 years after stopping”
“The average monthly regain was 0.4 kg, about four times faster than after behavioral interventions regardless of the amount of weight initially lost. Cardiometabolic benefits were projected to return to baseline even sooner after stopping GLP-1s.”
“By comparison, a previous study from the same group on weight regain after behavioral weight-loss programs showed less weight loss, 5.1 kg, but also much slower weight regain, 0.1 kg/mo, and much longer return to baseline, 3.9 years.”
1 Like
alternative approach
1 Like
Don’t Stop…Injecting
Hold on to that SYR-AA-II-EHHH-NGE
1 Like
Studies with obvious results?
Maybe that belongs in the US Food Quality thread as well.
2 Likes
Seems that these drugs are just a short-term solution. Possibly created that way, on purpose.
They provide an important nudge for people initially, which allows them to lose weight and improve their cardiovascular condition. I can be very difficult for obese people to lose weight initially while also exercising (due to existing joint problems and likely co-morbidities).
Behavioral modification (of diet and exercise) takes time so being on GLP-1s for 1-3 years while improving nutritional and exercise choices seems sensible to me. After that time-frame you can re-assess for longer term use (if need be).
1 Like
Nudge? I think the drugs mute food cravings as long as you are on them. If all you do is eat less of the same crap and don’t build better eating habits or plan to change your diet long term, the weight will come back as soon as the drug goes away. Also, caloric need is close enough to being proportional to your weight, so if you drop 30% of your weight, your post-diet steady state calorie need is going to be 30% lower. Forever, if you want to keep the weight off.
Yup.
It takes a serious change in lifestyle. If that change is not happening (via therapy or staying away from fellow overeaters) while on the drug, the weight will come back.
Just like any fad. This one just seems a shit-ton more expensive.
Also, 80% of weight-loss comes from diet. No one should get all hung up about exercise and its dangers. And that is what these drugs do: they suppress appetite.
The caloric adjustment is not quite linear due to changes in leptin when you lose weight (a very complex hormone that works against you when you are in a caloric deficit).
Its actually worse than 30% loss and 30% lower. Its more like 30% loss and 40-50% lower. This is one of the problems with dieting and being able to maintain those losses for the average person over time (yo-yo dieting is driven by this issue as people end up regaining the weight they lost and more).
This is one of the reasons resistance training is so important in dieting. Maintaining your muscle mass can somewhat mitigate that reduction (but not completely even in highly trained athletes).
Definitely. To the point of not working out for more than an hour. If someone can walk for an hour, it is time to increase the resistance, NOT increase the distance. Means, uphill or adding a weight vest, or (eventually) both. And I would recommend actually increasing muscle mass, as much as it seems counterintuitive to losing “weight.” Increasing muscle mass increases resting metabolism.
1 Like
I haven’t been looking at these… Is there anything stopping people from being on these forever?