> However, the study authors emphasize that more research is needed to confirm these mechanisms and determine whether the survival benefit observed in this real-world analysis represents a direct anti-cancer effect or an indirect result of improved metabolic health
Given it’s an observational study, I would bet on the latter. It’s really hard to know you’ve controlled for all confounding factors, and there’s a strong null hypothesis because we know that losing weight can have huge and wide-ranging health benefits.
Interesting that GLP-1s might have different effects on cancer _incidence_ vs. cancer _survival_.
A different study "GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Thyroid Cancer" was published in the Diabates Care journal in February 2023*
The conclusion of the 2023 study: "we found increased risk of all thyroid cancer and medullary thyroid cancer with use of GLP-1 RA, in particular after 1–3 years of treatment."
I wonder what the mechanistic hypothesis could be for GLP-1s increasing thyroid cancer _incidence_ (the probability of thyroid cancer occurring in patients taking GLP-1s) but increasing colon cancer _survival_ (the probability of surviving in patients taking GLP-1s who have colon cancer).
Of course there are numerous important differences across the studies (cancer type, France vs. USA data, etc.), I'm just curious about a why this might be the case.
Yeah, most GLP-1 benefits (or even adverse effects, like muscle loss) seem to be caused by the weight loss. We already knew obesity massively increases risk from a host of diseases, but GLP-1s are still treated with scepticism of the "oh but what about the side-effects we don't know about?!" variety?
> The cardioprotective effects of semaglutide were independent of baseline adiposity and weight loss and had only a small association with waist circumference, suggesting some mechanisms for benefit beyond adiposity reduction.
They won't, GLP-1 has almost no direct effect on skinny people. Many women with BMI around 22-23 are trying them to lose weight to match beauty standards and usually end up disappointed, not able to drop more than 1-2 kilos.
I'm a big fan of intermittent and water fasting. Have seen things in my blood work that doctors would require me on meds to reverse. Outside of that, I can't speak to the positive impacts on my mood, and general ability to focus.
The simplest solution to a lot of problems is consuming less with the assumption that, most of us (maybe not you), have a lot of spare energy sitting around.
A lie that we don't unlearn as we grow up is we "require" three meals a day. This is true for children who need obscene amounts of energy to grow, but, not for us desk-bound adults.
In the end, giving the body a break to heal by fasting or just consuming significantly less is going to leave more resources for the body energy to deal with other things.
ALmost everyone who shares their positive, any length fasting experience here gets downvoted. I will always upvote them. Ive done two 48 hour fasts and they were so relaxing and felt so natural. It just feels great to occasionally go about your day and not eat anything. Your gut tries to heal itself in between meals. The fact that almost all of HN just cant stand anyone mention they fast with positive benefits (and mounting evidence) is kidna sad. I guess every community has to be exceptionally closed minded about something.
An interesting FYI is a comment made by Peter Attia on his podcast.
He had a patient with metabolic markers that were not improving and they had exhausted all the typical avenues. Presumably they were things like weight loss.
They put the patient on GLP-1 but injected into the thighs (or butt, I don't recall) for the metabolic benefits without the hunger blunting effects.
It seems like GLP1, even in skinny patients (implied by Attia in this particular case), has metabolic benefits.
The longevity community seems to be hinting that there may be geroprotective aspects of GLp1 as well, so we may be looking at the benefits beyond weight loss for metabolism.
I for one don't "require" three meals a day, but I'm hungry in the morning, ergo, I like breakfast.
It's not so much about how often you eat but what and how much. Generally speaking, of course, I can't speak for any benefits of intermittent fasting (assuming equal daily calorie / macronutrient intake) because I'm uneducated in that regard. But TL;DR, I will agree that desk jockeys will need less calories than people with a more active job or lifestyle, and people need to adjust their lifestyle accordingly else they'll gain weight.
Awesome insight. It's not the disability I have, it's that I have never tried healing by fasting. Of course. Because my body was always busy trying to eat food instead of fixing and regrowing all the malformed tissue. Because that's how it works. When a person without legs starts to fast, the legs will suddenly develop.
It would be sensible for you to examine and interrogate why reading a general and fairly anodyne opinion about what might be a solution to a problem some people have led you to interpret it as a prescriptive and judgemental suggestion about the specific problem you specifically have.
Of course. That's why the nobel prize in medicine in 2016 was awarded to a cell biolgoist studying cellular autophagy for over a decade. It must be why glucose is not an essential dietary macronutrient and our liver can synthesizie it endogenously from fats and proteins (it just felt like doing that one day and stored all those chemical pathways in our genes I guess). That must also be why ketones produced from our fat stores burn so cleanly with less reactive inflammatory byproducts. In fact the cells in our brain actually prefer ketones to glucose. There's no such as water fasting. It's just random chance that when the body is in a state of ketosis it suppresses ghrelen and other hunger hormones or that countless other chemical pathways (de)activate or change. That's right the body has absolutely no design or adaptation for scarcity of food. Water fasting is totally foreign to the human body, that's why whenever we study ancient cultures...we find they practiced purposeful fasting. There's just no such thing as water fasting, it must be a modern eating disorder.
There's no chance it has anything to do with the last few million years of our evolution. It has no benefit or relevance now.
I am on GLP-1 (very low dose), and I’ve found that it seems to help me moderate my alcohol consumption as well. Maybe some thing like that could also be contributing to the effect.
I hypothesize that the appetite-suppressing effect of GLP-1 agonists contributes to the normalization of dopamine signaling in the brain. By mitigating the exaggerated dopamine fluctuations seen in food and sugar addiction, GLP-1 may promote a return to dopamine homeostasis, thereby reducing compulsive or addiction-like reward-seeking behaviors.
Same here. There's less wanting it but also, if I do indulge even one small glass of wine, the side effects are awful: broken sleep, acid reflux and a hangover the next day. It really slaps you in the face for indulging
Harsher side-effects to drinking sounds like an effective deterrent (although you'd think people would quit after that one hangover they'll never forget). Works for me with candy, a lot of it gives me tooth pain. My teeth are otherwise healthy, no cavities or anything.
They have a lot of anecdotal, observational, and emerging RCT evidence on their effects on substance consumption and abuse.
The biggest effect and best tested is on alcohol use disorder. Mechanistically we don't know if it's through some complex reward mechanism, or something simpler like "alcohol is a calorie and you consume fewer calories." The JAMA study showed that GLP-1 reduce Heavy Drinking Days (>2 drinks/day), but did not reduce overall drinking days. This would imply the simple mechanism -> it's hard to drink a lot of calories even if you do enjoy a drink.
More anecdotal evidence showing this effect in opiates, but nothing in an RCT yet.
So far, nothing has worked in stimulants. Cocaine and Meth abuse are insanely difficult to manage therapeutically right now.
I’m about to go to the cinema so I can’t find you references, but there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence at least of glp1’s curbing all sorts of addictive behaviour. I personally started Mounjaro last week and my coffee cravings have gone way, way down for the first time in my adult life.
I believe there is, I don't recall the source but have read that these drugs work by reducing cravings. So they have shown at least hints that they can work on any addictive behavior, not just overeating.
I am 100% a layman here so apologies if this is a stupid analysis. But I have read that fasting can improve odds and improve side effects during chemo. Would GLP-1 stabilising blood sugar be having the same effect?
Anecdotally speaking I can confirm this… it gets easy to just skip a meal, and you may end up skipping the entire day because the usual hunger signals are just not there.
For anyone tempted by that concept, please don’t and remember to try to eat your 1000-1500 calories every day.
Quick weight loss won’t do you any good if you lose all your muscle mass, or if you carve a deeper groove into body image issues.
It’s cliche but it’s true, slow and steady is the way to go.
Maybe I'm just an aging cynic, but I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop when it comes to GLP-1s. There have been so many claims of positive benefits that it almost seems too good to be true. With them being so expensive, the producers have every incentive to upsell using any study they can get their hands or money on.
There have been some. I've heard about eyesight related issues. A quick google found this article [0] where results showed that people using GLP-1 drugs were 68.6 times more likely to develop certain types of vision problems.
A large drop in HbA1c does cause early worsening of diabetic retinopathy. Regardless of how it's achieved. So expect some noise in generalized data.
Personally, I went from mild background retinopathy to PDR and getting laser treatment in about 3 months. My ophthalmologist (who has an academic background) didn't really know if this diagnosis had the same "quality" of someone who "naturally" progresses to PDR, but some studies say it's transient.
This is also an extremely rare vision problem. So absolute numbers are very tiny. The absolute numbers for diabetes, weight related problems, etc far dwarf this.
Right. On the whole I think these things are incredible.. looking to try myself after reading here in HN the other day about it working for all sorts of distractions. Just wanted to point out it's not all sunshine and rainbows which would certainly be suspicious.
A lot of the issues are hydration-related, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the eye ones are, too. Some water intake is from food, so if you eat less, you need to drink more. If you also tend to drink with food, and you’re eating less, you may drink less instead of the more that you need to be. Add in a generally dulled “I crave something” sense and you’ve got a recipe for not just going all day without eating, but also without drinking.
GLP-1s have been peescribed for like 20 years, but have been limited more to diabetics and extreme cases. So there is pretty good data. Not to say there isnt going to be side effects in some population sample, but we need to compare that with obesity and diabetes (which is a very bad disease).
But also do long-term studies; one thing I gathered (anecdotal through the internet so take it with a grain of salt) is that people revert to their old habits when they stop taking it. Not always, of course, and I think using it should always be done with guidance of a dietician etc to make lifestyle adjustments if needs be, but it did imply that long term usage is a factor that needs to be considered.
Getting people to eat more broccoli is almost entirely upside. Sure a handful of people will be allergic or whatever, but on a population level some interventions are just one positive after another, and there's no reason it has to be a deal made with the devil.
Actually there is a very real effect on which foods you find appealing and which ones are kind of gross. It’s a thing the food companies have been studying, and their own studies show that people on GLP1s tend to skip the junk food aisle and head towards the produce section instead.
Oddly enough semaglutide is making me crave sugar more. It might be the frequent sensation of having low blood sugar. Idk.
It does make me choose more dense meals though since I know I can't eat that much due to delayed gastric emptying. But I have to budget some room for prunes to counteract the constipation. It definitely makes you think about what you eat.
I can confirm that. On GLP-1s (when they worked for me, anyway), I'd routinely think "pizza? Bleh, so fatty, I'd really like some chicken breast with roast potatoes instead right now".
I don’t know. Having listened to a number of interviews with some of the founders in this area of drug research I came away with a much higher respect and significantly less cynicism toward big pharmaceutical. Novo Nordisk is run by a nonprofit even.
I was in that boat too but with NAFLD and now liver fibrosis despite not eating all that much sugar and having a BMI that is high but partially due to muscle I finally gave in to see if semaglutide will help.
Only on week 3 but it's been a rollercoaster. It seems to have quite a broad spectrum of effects. I'm still not sure I'll be able to stay on it but losing 10 pounds is a nice counterpoint to the side-effects.
I am sort of in your boat in seeing what may come. There are a few very rare conditions but the benefits seem to out weigh (ha, I will take the pun!) The down sides.
While it might mean the incident rare of some things goes up, those that it reduces are far more impactful and where far more likely to have mortality issues. Sort of like how Chemotherapy is poisonous but potential has better long term odds, only chemo is far more extreme than GPL1.
Time will tell but so far it is looking kind of good with a few lesser issues.
I'm sure there will be negative side effects but the main outcome of these drugs is that you eat less. Many of us have trained ourselves to eat at a frequency and volume way beyond what is really required to keep our body functioning. This leads to weight gain in most people and thus is the focus but even independent of weight there are effects of continuously eating poor quality foods which are unlikely to be good. So I'm not surprised that there are all these miraculous sounding positive side effects to drugs which prevent most people from putting their metabolic system under near constant load.
When the side effects are better understood I suspect for the average person, eating less would be a net benefit to their overall health - _even if they don't lose any weight_.
Several members of my family are into glp-1 both for glucose control and for weight loss. Taking different brands (wegovy, ozempic and others.) They all mention.th terrible secondary effects when you eat something "forbidden" (tacos, cake or icecream e.g.) .
Also It causes constipation apparently, which for most of them is not that much of an issue, but given that I've IBS-C, I'm happy to not have to take it.
More anecdata, my spouse and I have been on Mounjaro since Jan 2025 guided by private health insurance.
I have suffered almost the entire gamut of side effects from the beginning until I tried split dosing twice a week, and even then there’s still the occasional instance of me learning that I should not have eaten that and the following 9 hours are going to revolve around stomach pain.
My partner’s journey on the other hand has been smooth sailing the entire time.
YMMV, do your own research but definitely double check any search results with your doctor first… lots of urban myths going around.
I do recommend it though, I am the healthiest I’ve been in literally 10 years.
Most medications have negative side effects because otherwise our bodies would already have whatever changes they make through evolution. My personal theory (based on nothing but my own intuition) is that GLP-1s are an adaptation to the modern world that evolution hasn't caught up with yet.
And we know what the adaptation is: calorie constraint. We evolved in a calorie constrained environment. We don't live in one now. Our set point for desire to eat is clearly too high. None of this means that glp-1 inhibitors don't have other side effects, of course.
I’m sure some negative effects will be found but from what I understand lowering your weight outweighs (no pun intended) a lot of possible side effects. Closest thing to a miracle cure and quality of life improvement
The fact is though that but-for taking the drugs a lot of the folks that take these things would be long dead before, say, the GLP-1 induced cancer kicked in.
> I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop when it comes to GLP-1s
We know there are downsides. They’re just irrelevant compared to being obese. (Or alcoholic. Or, potentially, overweight.)
It might be a vitamin, where there literally aren’t any downsides. I’m sceptical of that. But to the degree there is mass cognitive bias in respect of GLP-1s, it’s against them. (I suspect these are sour grapes due to the drugs being unreachable for many.)
My frank concern is we’re separating into a social media addicted, unvaccinated and obese population on one hand and a wealthy, insured, disease free and fit one on the other. Those are dangerous class and physical divides to risk becoming heritable (socially, not genetically).
GLP-1’s should make you less concerned in that case, they’re poised to become extremely affordable very soon. Ending the obesity epidemic will do more to bridge the class divide than anything I can practically imagine. Not to mention the other compulsions these drugs help moderate - alcohol, tobacco, gambling etc. It’s my best hope for worldwide quality of life improvement in the next 10 years.
My opinion has shifted over the years. At first I also thought it was largely just sour grapes re: accessibility and fear of the unknown, but now I’m thinking that a large number of people are going to be so far deep into anti-GLP opinions and hot takes they can’t backtrack out of it. Much like political or social beliefs you make into your identity. Too embarrassing to admit you might be wrong.
I know you’re alluding to the same thing, it’s just interesting to me someone else in the world seems to share these thoughts. I also think it may really delineate a multi-generational class divide that is hard to break.
Or all the folks on GLP-1s will develop some rare form of cancer and die early leaving the world to the so-called haters.
> Maybe I'm just an aging cynic, but I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop when it comes to GLP-1s. There have been so many claims of positive benefits that it almost seems too good to be true.
Well, read up the testimony of those who stopped taking it for adverse effects, such as nonexistent intestinal transit and -yuck- sulfur burps.
Yeah I stopped because I didn't like the way it made me feel. I needed it because my blood sugar was way too high and it helped me drop close to 60 pounds in 6-8 months, but I did not like how it made me feel and I lost more muscle than I was happy with.
I've gained about 15-20 pounds back, but I'm now much healthier overall.
I like how my brain works and I didn't like something affecting or changing that because I couldn't put the fork down. Easy decision for me
Given all the potential money, if they are issues, I expect it to go down like tobacco companies back in the days actively suppressing undesirable research by harassing researchers, influencing peer review journals or/and funding research casting doubt on the benefits of this drug. Chances are that any negative effects won't be obvious until it's too late. Look at microplastics, they have been around for just over a century and it's only now that we are starting to realize that they have several negative effects.
GLP-1s are just showing what people always knew to be true but was not clinically actionable — most of our health problems come from eating too much and being fat.
Well, now it's actionable. No magic, just adherence.
Haven't you been reading Hackernews for the past 10 years? Sugar has been implicated in pretty much every major late-life disease, and the closest thing to a cure before GLP-1 agonists was fasting.
Same. I think that pharmaceutical industry is lot more bleak now than it was when Fen-Phen became popular. GLP-1 usage is largely off-label as far as I know, but I wouldn't trust them even if it wasn't. There is a mountain of precedent for these companies to choose profit over health, and for our government(s) to aid them in covering up evidence of negative effects on the latter for the sake of the former.
The popularity of these drugs is specifically from the FDA-approved "weight loss" indication. You're at least a few years behind. I would also think the many many years when it was only prescribed for diabetes would have yielded some data about negative effects, (other than the ocular issue) if there were any. Glp-1s were so unprofitable, Novo Nordisk let their Canadian patent lapse almost a decade ago, rather than pay the upkeep fee lol. So I dont think anyone is protecting them from bad press.
There may be some herbal supplements that impact GLP-1 release to some extent, but what is being talked about here are synthetic GLP-1 receptor agonists.
GLP-1 agonists? Well they derived them from a lizard, so, uh… sort of? But no, no foods you eat are really going to have GLP-1 agonists in them, not to any meaningful degree anyway. Plus if you’re eating them they have to survive at least part of the digestive tract, which means you need even more since some of it’ll be lost.
Your body produces GLP-1, but it lives in the blood for like minutes. The innovation was finding a chemical that tickles the same receptors but survives in the body for days at a time.
Private people invested a lot of money to develop this and get it through testing. Allowing them to reap the benefits from their investment for a limited time is just fine.
It's not people couldn't also: Diet, exercise, choose veggies, eat more fiber, etc
Protecting it before generic is fine, but the pricing doesn't make sense.
If it's $1000 per month cost per person when it's the name brand, how many people are on it? At this point just the diabetics and people with really good insurance?
Wouldn't they make a hell of a lot more money selling it for $100 during their protected period to 1000x the people.
No, it is not. They said that since someone, which is typically a fictive person, had spent a lot of money, they deserve to restrict physical persons' access to supposedly life saving substances.
I would like to know how far they take that position.
How many people do you feel liek you are personally responsible for killing because you haven't given 100% of your disposal income to food relief? Hundreds? Thousands?
This isn't "I could use my money to acquire food for the poor." It's "I'm going to prevent anyone else from selling food, and that will let me charge 100x as much for food."
The standard for medical interventions usually isn’t “could it work?” or “should it work?” but “does it work?”
This is why the efficacy of every single contraceptive method isn’t way higher than it is. Lots of them should work almost perfectly… but the harder they are to use correctly, the less effective they in-fact are.
Eating less, exercising more, has worked for the entire existence of human race. In fact, it worked for me just fine too. GLP-1s are a safe and proven tool and should be used wherever appropriate to assist people. Both of these are simple facts that aren't in contradiction with either other.
But saying the patent owners shouldn't be allowed to reap the benefits of their investment is ridiculous, especially when it's completely possible to lose weight in other ways. 6 years isn't that long to wait anyway.
if you saw the 60 Minutes on compounding pharmacies, which are completely unregulated and never inspected, and sometimes contaminate products out of lack of care/repercussions
you'd never touch a compounded pharmacy product ever again
People are straight up buying black market "research use only, not to be used in humans" GLP-1. Compounding pharmacies are reliable, safe and well regulated compared to that.
Clearly, there's an entire spectrum of tradeoffs between safety/shadiness, availability and price. I think that's a good thing.
Compounding pharmacies are regulated by section 503 of the FD&C act, and also subject to inspection.
Are you referring to the fact that the FDA does not inspect all facilities because they have limited resources? This applies to pharmaceutical companies as much as it does to compounders. If you think the FDA posts inspectors at every pharmaceutical company in India, you’d be wrong.
I use that to help me stay asleep. I also feed large amounts of it to horses and deer before, during and after 4th of July since everyone here launches mortars from their fields. Helps them chill.
I do not like the framing. GLP-1 drugs help people lose weight, and it is the weight loss that lowers death rates in colon cancer[1]. This is making it sound like the drug itself is reducing cancer.
> After adjusting for age, body mass index (BMI), disease severity and other health factors, GLP-1 users still showed significantly lower odds of death, suggesting a strong and independent protective effect.
Given it’s an observational study, I would bet on the latter. It’s really hard to know you’ve controlled for all confounding factors, and there’s a strong null hypothesis because we know that losing weight can have huge and wide-ranging health benefits.
A different study "GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Thyroid Cancer" was published in the Diabates Care journal in February 2023*
The conclusion of the 2023 study: "we found increased risk of all thyroid cancer and medullary thyroid cancer with use of GLP-1 RA, in particular after 1–3 years of treatment."
I wonder what the mechanistic hypothesis could be for GLP-1s increasing thyroid cancer _incidence_ (the probability of thyroid cancer occurring in patients taking GLP-1s) but increasing colon cancer _survival_ (the probability of surviving in patients taking GLP-1s who have colon cancer).
Of course there are numerous important differences across the studies (cancer type, France vs. USA data, etc.), I'm just curious about a why this might be the case.
*https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article-abstract/46/2/384/...
There’s growing evidence of cardioprotective effects independent of weight loss.
Eg https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
> The cardioprotective effects of semaglutide were independent of baseline adiposity and weight loss and had only a small association with waist circumference, suggesting some mechanisms for benefit beyond adiposity reduction.
https://www.kidneyfund.org/treatments/medicines-kidney-disea...
I'm a big fan of intermittent and water fasting. Have seen things in my blood work that doctors would require me on meds to reverse. Outside of that, I can't speak to the positive impacts on my mood, and general ability to focus.
The simplest solution to a lot of problems is consuming less with the assumption that, most of us (maybe not you), have a lot of spare energy sitting around.
A lie that we don't unlearn as we grow up is we "require" three meals a day. This is true for children who need obscene amounts of energy to grow, but, not for us desk-bound adults.
In the end, giving the body a break to heal by fasting or just consuming significantly less is going to leave more resources for the body energy to deal with other things.
He had a patient with metabolic markers that were not improving and they had exhausted all the typical avenues. Presumably they were things like weight loss.
They put the patient on GLP-1 but injected into the thighs (or butt, I don't recall) for the metabolic benefits without the hunger blunting effects.
It seems like GLP1, even in skinny patients (implied by Attia in this particular case), has metabolic benefits.
The longevity community seems to be hinting that there may be geroprotective aspects of GLp1 as well, so we may be looking at the benefits beyond weight loss for metabolism.
It's not so much about how often you eat but what and how much. Generally speaking, of course, I can't speak for any benefits of intermittent fasting (assuming equal daily calorie / macronutrient intake) because I'm uneducated in that regard. But TL;DR, I will agree that desk jockeys will need less calories than people with a more active job or lifestyle, and people need to adjust their lifestyle accordingly else they'll gain weight.
There's no chance it has anything to do with the last few million years of our evolution. It has no benefit or relevance now.
Sources?
The biggest effect and best tested is on alcohol use disorder. Mechanistically we don't know if it's through some complex reward mechanism, or something simpler like "alcohol is a calorie and you consume fewer calories." The JAMA study showed that GLP-1 reduce Heavy Drinking Days (>2 drinks/day), but did not reduce overall drinking days. This would imply the simple mechanism -> it's hard to drink a lot of calories even if you do enjoy a drink.
More anecdotal evidence showing this effect in opiates, but nothing in an RCT yet.
So far, nothing has worked in stimulants. Cocaine and Meth abuse are insanely difficult to manage therapeutically right now.
Glucagon-like peptide 1 agonist and effects on reward behaviour: A systematic review - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003193842... | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2024.114622 - Physiology & Behavior Volume 283, 1 September 2024, 114622
GLP-1 for Addiction: the Medical Evidence for Opioid, Nicotine, and Alcohol Use Disorder - https://recursiveadaptation.com/p/the-growing-scientific-cas... - May 14th, 2024
The central GLP-1: implications for food and drug reward - https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/1... | https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2013.00181 - Front. Neurosci., October 13th, 2013
To me, it’s anecdotal, of course, but I have same sense of being in control over alcohol intake as food intake.
Basically makes it much easier for me to avoid binging.
But my thinking there may be naive.
For anyone tempted by that concept, please don’t and remember to try to eat your 1000-1500 calories every day.
Quick weight loss won’t do you any good if you lose all your muscle mass, or if you carve a deeper groove into body image issues.
It’s cliche but it’s true, slow and steady is the way to go.
If it's all upside, then I'm happy to be wrong.
[0]: https://www.aao.org/newsroom/news-releases/detail/do-glp-1-d...
Personally, I went from mild background retinopathy to PDR and getting laser treatment in about 3 months. My ophthalmologist (who has an academic background) didn't really know if this diagnosis had the same "quality" of someone who "naturally" progresses to PDR, but some studies say it's transient.
(my partner is on a GLP-1, and lost ~25 lbs in 3 months)
Many of us wish we didn't have to drive a car. Many of us also wish we didn't live in a world where hyperprocessed foods weren't the norm
Coincidentally also a factor of why many Americans take GLP-1 frugs
Without it I'd die sooner anyway.
Having that on a repeat loop is no fun. Getting rid of it is worth all of the mild side effects and cost.
Getting people to eat more broccoli is almost entirely upside. Sure a handful of people will be allergic or whatever, but on a population level some interventions are just one positive after another, and there's no reason it has to be a deal made with the devil.
It does make me choose more dense meals though since I know I can't eat that much due to delayed gastric emptying. But I have to budget some room for prunes to counteract the constipation. It definitely makes you think about what you eat.
Only on week 3 but it's been a rollercoaster. It seems to have quite a broad spectrum of effects. I'm still not sure I'll be able to stay on it but losing 10 pounds is a nice counterpoint to the side-effects.
While it might mean the incident rare of some things goes up, those that it reduces are far more impactful and where far more likely to have mortality issues. Sort of like how Chemotherapy is poisonous but potential has better long term odds, only chemo is far more extreme than GPL1.
Time will tell but so far it is looking kind of good with a few lesser issues.
When the side effects are better understood I suspect for the average person, eating less would be a net benefit to their overall health - _even if they don't lose any weight_.
I have suffered almost the entire gamut of side effects from the beginning until I tried split dosing twice a week, and even then there’s still the occasional instance of me learning that I should not have eaten that and the following 9 hours are going to revolve around stomach pain.
My partner’s journey on the other hand has been smooth sailing the entire time.
YMMV, do your own research but definitely double check any search results with your doctor first… lots of urban myths going around.
I do recommend it though, I am the healthiest I’ve been in literally 10 years.
That's not what evolution is, at all
We know there are downsides. They’re just irrelevant compared to being obese. (Or alcoholic. Or, potentially, overweight.)
It might be a vitamin, where there literally aren’t any downsides. I’m sceptical of that. But to the degree there is mass cognitive bias in respect of GLP-1s, it’s against them. (I suspect these are sour grapes due to the drugs being unreachable for many.)
My frank concern is we’re separating into a social media addicted, unvaccinated and obese population on one hand and a wealthy, insured, disease free and fit one on the other. Those are dangerous class and physical divides to risk becoming heritable (socially, not genetically).
My hope is the "waiting for the other shoe to drop" folks are just expressing sour grapes.
If it runs deeper and merges with the anti-vaxers, we've got a behavioural problem fuelling a class divide. That is my fear.
My opinion has shifted over the years. At first I also thought it was largely just sour grapes re: accessibility and fear of the unknown, but now I’m thinking that a large number of people are going to be so far deep into anti-GLP opinions and hot takes they can’t backtrack out of it. Much like political or social beliefs you make into your identity. Too embarrassing to admit you might be wrong.
I know you’re alluding to the same thing, it’s just interesting to me someone else in the world seems to share these thoughts. I also think it may really delineate a multi-generational class divide that is hard to break.
Or all the folks on GLP-1s will develop some rare form of cancer and die early leaving the world to the so-called haters.
Healthy, non-obese individuals likely aren't seeing these "benefits"... But I'm not a doctor, I just pretend to be one on the Internet.
Well, read up the testimony of those who stopped taking it for adverse effects, such as nonexistent intestinal transit and -yuck- sulfur burps.
I've gained about 15-20 pounds back, but I'm now much healthier overall.
I like how my brain works and I didn't like something affecting or changing that because I couldn't put the fork down. Easy decision for me
Antibiotics and vaccines may not be completely free lunches, but they're very good at what they do.
Well, now it's actionable. No magic, just adherence.
Your body produces GLP-1, but it lives in the blood for like minutes. The innovation was finding a chemical that tickles the same receptors but survives in the body for days at a time.
L-tryptophan > Indole > Raises GLP-1
lots of people will miss out on benefits, like oh preventing death
our drug system is weird
It's not people couldn't also: Diet, exercise, choose veggies, eat more fiber, etc
If it's $1000 per month cost per person when it's the name brand, how many people are on it? At this point just the diabetics and people with really good insurance?
Wouldn't they make a hell of a lot more money selling it for $100 during their protected period to 1000x the people.
Or we could just move to a sane economic system where we don't have to beg the rich/reward people for having money
Is it ethical for me to pay someone to murder you? Does it matter if it costs me a large amount of money or not?
I would like to know how far they take that position.
Your closing remark is overly simplistic and offers a contradiction: if those things would work for these obese people, they wouldn't need GLPs.
This is why the efficacy of every single contraceptive method isn’t way higher than it is. Lots of them should work almost perfectly… but the harder they are to use correctly, the less effective they in-fact are.
But saying the patent owners shouldn't be allowed to reap the benefits of their investment is ridiculous, especially when it's completely possible to lose weight in other ways. 6 years isn't that long to wait anyway.
GLP-1 has been demonstrated to even cure some types of long-covid in some people in some cases
and various other diseases
but it's priced way out of reach even for micro-doses until it becomes generic
so all those cases suffer until 2030, if they make it that far, five years is a long time
you'd never touch a compounded pharmacy product ever again
people have died from contamination
Clearly, there's an entire spectrum of tradeoffs between safety/shadiness, availability and price. I think that's a good thing.
Are you referring to the fact that the FDA does not inspect all facilities because they have limited resources? This applies to pharmaceutical companies as much as it does to compounders. If you think the FDA posts inspectors at every pharmaceutical company in India, you’d be wrong.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221112471...
> Indole increased GLP-1 release during short exposures, but it reduced secretion over longer periods.
[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12672-025-03902-4
It’s observational. They are saying they see correlation.
Your suggested mechanism is plausible, and likely, of course, but that might only be part of the effect.
I think it’s still valuable findings and can help direct further studies.