Hacker News Reader

Comment by karaterobot | Hacker News Reader

For a lot of people, it's kind of a choice of which substance you are going to be dependent on. It's all expensive and sad, but between Ozempic and cigarettes, alcohol, or overeating, Ozempic has got to be healthier, and quite possibly cheaper in the long run.

View on HN

I took it and started out with a small dose. The impact of that dose wore off eventually and the plan at my clinic was to raise it over time.

I am concerned that maybe there isn't a dose where you can stop taking more and keep the results. I am worried that everybody will need to keep taking more as they build up more tolerance to it. The study that showed how effective the drug is was 60 weeks long.

That is a long time, but it doesn't show what happens if somebody plans on staying on the drug for years.

do you know what tolerance effects are acknowledged by the makers/doctors? I was thinking this was more like insulin; is it more like an opiate?

Is a drug or drug-like-food (ie, sugar) dependency really the only option?

No, there's also badmington.

What do you suggest otherwise? Clearly whatever we're doing now has led us to this point.

Versus, like, "just suck it up"? No, but empirically that strategy has had poor results across the wider population. It seems like it would work, but usually doesn't. At some point people look for more effective strategies.

It's that, or dropping out of modern life, as far as I can tell.

Everyone's on something and/or coping in unhealthy ways.

Most research indicates "yes", conditioned on the consensus of what comprises the modern lifestyle.

I've been trying to understand what changed to create the obesity epidemic. Many things contribute, but it's hard to identify the smoking gun. My understanding is that one major lever seems to be the advent of snacks, refrigeration, and microwaves. Drastically reduced food prep overhead has radically alerted eating patterns.

It seems pretty obvious that the massive injection of sugar in the 60s and 70s into diets paved the way for pretty much everything else that followed(snacks, fast food, convenient food, etc). I guess we can all ignore that diabetes is driven by insulin resistance and the body's inability to process glucose, which is conveniently also the predominant thing in our food today, because we would rather look the other way and continue living in a fairy tale...that is until we are disease ridden in our 40s, at which point we can live out the rest of our lives on meds and in the hospital.

To pile on other popular theories on smoking guns, there is a widespread decrease in physical activity levels. Physical activity can delay or prevent type 2 diabetes, as well as having widespread benefits on almost every system of the body. Physical activity also improves mental health, which impacts some behaviors around emotional/addiction driven over eating.

We do more physical activity now than people did in the 70s and 80s and we are significantly fatter also. I doubt it's that.

I doubt we do more physical activity now than people did in the 70s and 80s.

Sure, people may go to the gym more... But they also take the lift or the escalator in stead of the stairs much more, and the car in stead of a bicycle or walking. Any source for your claim?

Read Gary Taubes

Healthier in what sense? There is little knowledge of long term side effects and it isn't even approved for weight loss, it is specifically for people with diabetes.

Semaglutide, the active ingredient in Ozempic, is absolutely approved in the US for weight loss. Ozempic is the trade name for the diabetes medication, Wegovy is the trade name for the weight loss medication. They are the exact same medication, in the same formulation.

Ah, good to know!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com