> everyone, even the skinny folks, should be on GLP1 drugs
But as a skinny person, I can already easily reduce caloric intake as much as I want to. My body is "blessed" with weak food cravings and solid blood glucose levels while fasting.
So while I do recommend these drugs to people who need them, I don't think they'd help me at all more than merely deciding one day to monitor and control my weight to a very narrow target range. It's like the opposite of "its easy! Just eat less!" ... you guys are telling skinny people "Oh but eating at a maintenance/deficit will be too hard for you to do just by thinking you want to! You'll need a drug!"
I can easily lose 20-40 lbs just by getting lazy and not cooking myself food. It's literally no challenge at all. But neither is gaining 20-40 lbs when I want to. I know this is relatively unique, I don't blame obese people for "lack of will". I know they have different biochemistry because it doesn't take me any willpower to gain or lose weight on demand. It's literally as effortless as deciding to wear more dressy clothes this year. I'm 6-foot tall and I can set and indefinitely maintain almost any weight I want between 145 and 200 lbs within +/- 3 lbs, with very little effort.
Over 190 lbs gets a bit hard to maintain, under 155 also gets a bit hard to maintain. Supposedly "normal" BMI for my height goes all the way down to 136 lbs but I think that's probably total bullshit -- that's very, very, very skinny.
If you look at the US today, an average of just 1 in 4 people are not medically overweight or obese. What was considered (and is factually) obese, is now considered "chubby" or "curvy" if not normal by most Americans for whom that is normal.
This is why I hate the 'body positivity' movement as it is right now. It's great that this movement tries to make (especially young) people understand that you don't need to have a tiny cover model body to look good (an that it's unhealthy too). But what it's turned into is that obese people are becoming an example to others without any attention to health issues.
It's no longer allowed to advertise smoking pretty much anywhere, but glorifying (morbid) obesity on social media and TV is fine. Meanwhile, obesity is arguably as bad as or worse than smoking.
Has this been proven in humans? The last review article I read mentioned that it was true for lab mice, but resulted in a suppressed immune response, which would result in early mortality for mice not living in a sterile (specific pathogen free; SPF) labitat.
Seems like it but it still might not be worth it:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/12/12/acc-does-calorie-restr...
The problem with this is how a continuous caloric deficit affects your quality of life. Your body tends to adapt by making you feel tired and killing your libido. Not to mention that being underweight becomes a health hazard past a certain age.
IMO, if you aren't overweight, eating a healthy diet and enough calories to maintain your weight will give you the best combination of longevity and durability.
I could probably just eat better (ie not one meal a day) and get “healthy”…not that I’m unhealthy now. Maybe, I prefer to live in denial.
Three small meals a day and cut out the snacks and no drugs for me to take for the rest of my life.
You burn ~50 calories per hour doing nothing.
You're saying that the only way to live longer is to lay down and do nothing and IV ~50 calories per hour into your body.
You're not going to live very long like that.
You're obviously not going to live very long if you simply never eat and starve to death.