Trump is slimmer now than he was while in office due to semaglutide?

[hal2kilo]

NM throughput is so slow today, I got confused. It's on my end.

 

[nakedfrog]

NM throughput is so slow today, I got confused. It's on my end.

I've been getting 504 Gateway errors all morning.

 

[hal2kilo]

I've been getting 504 Gateway errors all morning.

Finally, found where I left this. Yea, it wasn't me after all. Actually, I thought it was better but still huge lags.

 

[Stopsignhank]

Is this the first fatality?

Woman dies after taking Ozempic to lose weight for daughter’s wedding

Trish Webster lost 16 kilograms but the consequences were allegedly lethal

www.independent.co.uk

In a statement to The Independent, a UK-based spokesperson for Novo Nordisk, the Danish pharmaceutical company that manufactures Ozempic, said that they do not support Ozempic specifically for weight loss and that the safety of their patients is “paramount.”

“Gastrointestinal (GI) events are well-known side effects of the GLP-1 class. For semaglutide, most GI side effects were mild to moderate in severity and of short duration. The gastrointestinal events led to permanent treatment discontinuation in 4.3% of patients. GLP-1s are known to cause a delay in gastric emptying, as noted in the label. Delayed gastric emptying, nausea and vomiting are listed as side effects within the SMPC.”

After three months of taking Ozempic, then allegedly switching to a different weight loss drug called Saxenda for another two months, 60 Minutes Australia does not specify if the second drug was on prescription or not.

Ms Webster lost 16 kilograms (35 pounds) altogether.

Mr Webster told the TV show that the side effects from the drug were allegedly making her seriously ill, suffering from constant vomiting, diarrhoea and nausea; on 16 January, things took a turn for the worse.

If you voluntarily take drug 1 and it is making you sick and then you switch to drug 2 and you are still getting sick. At what point do you stop taking the drugs?

 

[iRONic]

Ask Trish. Wait, never mind...

 

[GodisanAtheist]

If you voluntarily take drug 1 and it is making you sick and then you switch to drug 2 and you are still getting sick. At what point do you stop taking the drugs?

-When you die, naturally...

 

[Muse]

I've already admitted several people with Ozempic side effects. - several with acute pancreatitis and one with acute renal failure. They got better, thankfully.

I take nothing. Sometimes vitamins, but AFAIK they don't have side effects.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Wife is taking this drug and has so far lost 25 lbs. Getting on it myself soon as I'm overweight and borderline diabetic.

The drug has gotten so popular the highest dose was out of stock across the country for almost 2 months.

It's expensive though, costing about $1K per month. Insurance will usually only cover if prescribed for diabetes, which makes no sense since weight loss tends to prevent diabetes to begin with.

This country stopped doing preventive medicine long ago, not lucrative enough. Why make a million in profits doing preventive, proactive medicine when you can make Billions off of reactive medicine. Insurance companies feeds off of reactive medicine as well.

 

[Shmee]

Here’s a recent Ars technica article on the drug.

Weight-loss drugs Ozempic and Wegovy also protect your heart

Semaglutide reduces heart failure symptoms by bringing down body weight.

arstechnica.com

So far it has several benefits. Blood sugar control, appetite suppressant with attendant weight loss, strangely enough suppresses desire to drink alcohol, and heart benefits that appear greater than simply from the weight loss.

From the comments in the article stopping the drug leads to regaining all the lost weight (how that differs from rebound dieting I don’t know) and it may cause gastroparesis (delayed stomach emptying).

It also costs $$$$ / month.

Still there’s a lot of upsides. Might be the new statins.

Is the drug any good, really? No one wants to lose too much weight, but maybe a little...should I look into taking it if it is covered by insurance?

 

[dank69]

Is the drug any good, really? No one wants to lose too much weight, but maybe a little...should I look into taking it if it is covered by insurance?

All the fat celebrities are taking it now. That should tell you it is safe, at least when not abused. Big Pharma doesn't need dead celebrities on its hands.

 

[nakedfrog]

Is the drug any good, really? No one wants to lose too much weight, but maybe a little...should I look into taking it if it is covered by insurance?

The neat thing about eating less is you don't have to worry about whether it's covered by insurance or if it will have potentially severe health complications

 

[Paratus]

Is the drug any good, really? No one wants to lose too much weight, but maybe a little...should I look into taking it if it is covered by insurance?

Ars just had another article on the potential benefits today.

Obesity drug Wegovy reduces cardiovascular risks for those at high risk

The finding means 15 fewer cardiovascular events per 1,000 patients treated.

arstechnica.com

I personally don’t take it and am not a doctor so like all the commercials say, “talk to your doctor to find out if it’s right for you “

 

[hal2kilo]

As a person who has fought weight for most of my life, the pandemic caused me to make some changes in my lifestyle, I stopped drinking on a regular basis, and walk as much as my body will let me. Dropped 40 lbs, but I'm still am not as light as the insurance companies recommend. I still crave me some cookies and it bothers me that I can't resist (damn pot). If the stuff really works and enough companies join the bandwagon (Pfizer is the latest to announce something) and the costs go down, I would seriously consider it to get rid of the 25 to 30 pounds that I would still love to get rid off. I'm considering giving up the weed, but not there yet.

 

[MrSquished]

whatever he's taking, hopefully it causes him to keel over and die at some point, sooner than later preferred.

 

[trenchfoot]

I'm pretty sure the only reason Trump may be on the stuff is so he can keep gulping down those Big Mac combo gut bombs as a stress therapeutical. His stress levels at the moment must have his clogged arteries stretched paper thin. Awwww, too bad it's a cycle his body can't stay ahead of if that's where he's at. Can't imagine he'd cut himself off from his gluttonous debauchery.

 

[Muse]

AI bot?

 

[Muse]

As a person who has fought weight for most of my life, the pandemic caused me to make some changes in my lifestyle, I stopped drinking on a regular basis, and walk as much as my body will let me. Dropped 40 lbs, but I'm still am not as light as the insurance companies recommend. I still crave me some cookies and it bothers me that I can't resist (damn pot). If the stuff really works and enough companies join the bandwagon (Pfizer is the latest to announce something) and the costs go down, I would seriously consider it to get rid of the 25 to 30 pounds that I would still love to get rid off. I'm considering giving up the weed, but not there yet.

Give up cookies, period!

 

[darkswordsman17]

Is the drug any good, really? No one wants to lose too much weight, but maybe a little...should I look into taking it if it is covered by insurance?

It works but it stops working once you stop taking it meaning unless you can afford to stay on it regularly you'll just end up yo-yoing in weight (which will bring its own health issues), and quite a few people end up gaining more weight than they had before they started using it after they stop. Its also expensive (thousands per month) and almost guaranteed to not be covered by insurance, and would only for probably severe diabetics that have already tried multiple other avenues. Well unless you're paying so much in insurance that you could basically afford it without insurance. Its also hard to come by because of assholes who do not need it buying up the supply (and so unless you are a pretty severe diabetic, please don't fuck over other people by trying to get on this stuff, although you should discuss it with your doctor), restricting its availability, which makes it more expensive. I have a strong hunch insurance will be much more likely to push you to something else (even surgery) as it should be cheaper. I actually wonder if insurance companies might resort to paying for liposuction to try and save costs from people trying to get on this stuff, as that will probably be cheaper.

It also has quite a few side effects, but for most people the benefits (health for the people that actually need it, and for those that don't the weight loss for beauty standards) will outweigh those. So far the side effects are pretty typical of many drugs and/or diet changes, gastrointestinal issues, nausea (essentially that's how this stuff works, it makes you nauseous a lot which makes you lose your appetite so you eat less), and the like.

The neat thing about eating less is you don't have to worry about whether it's covered by insurance or if it will have potentially severe health complications

Yes yes, if only someone had thought of that, we could've solved this whole issue! Hell imagine all the famines that wouldn't have mattered if we simply could will ourselves to eat less! Yes that's hyperbole but I'm over this "fat people just need to eat less" shit that ignores a multitude of other factors. Even most healthy people find maintaining their weight to be difficult, and I know a shitload of people that were very healthy by eating healthy and exercising that hurt themselves doing the latter and end up having issues from then on being healthy just in their diet. And that ignores how things big and small (poverty, life events like losing a loved one, and many many other) can impact this.

Also, eating less will have health complications. Anytime you make changes to your diet brings health complications. Often the benefits can outweigh the negatives, but acting like there's no downside is just false. Although if you're supporting fairly gradual changes that can mitigate a lot of that.

Further, food restrictions won't work long term for the vast majority of people, which means they will just end up gaining the weight back, sometimes more, and that's not even the people that end up with eating disorders from doing such. Saying just eat less is pointless. Its like you going "just use less gas" as the fix for climate change. Sure, it will work some and have benefits, but acting like its just that simple is so overly simplistic that you're not actually offering anything meaningful in this discussion.

 

[darkswordsman17]

As a person who has fought weight for most of my life, the pandemic caused me to make some changes in my lifestyle, I stopped drinking on a regular basis, and walk as much as my body will let me. Dropped 40 lbs, but I'm still am not as light as the insurance companies recommend. I still crave me some cookies and it bothers me that I can't resist (damn pot). If the stuff really works and enough companies join the bandwagon (Pfizer is the latest to announce something) and the costs go down, I would seriously consider it to get rid of the 25 to 30 pounds that I would still love to get rid off. I'm considering giving up the weed, but not there yet.

It really won't fix that as the moment you go off of it you'll gain the weight back. Its good that you've made long term changes, keep with those, and don't sweat the rest. Seriously just stressing about that will very likely do more harm than that weight will. There's also studies showing that as you age some extra weight is better for your health (although we're talking like 60s+ I believe).

Fuck what the insurance companies call healthy. Seriously, its based on shit we know is straight up false. For instance the BMI is so broken that its basically the lie detector test version of health metric, it actively makes things worse but people still act as though it has any legitimacy whatsoever but it doesn't. And we know it doesn't.

Give up cookies, period!

Nah, unless you're overeating them to the point of it being problematic. You can make healthier cookies or work on a way to control portion. And almost all people if they give up something like that will just replace it with something else equally if not more problematic if they go full abstinence only anyway. Just find healthier ways to enjoy something you clearly do. Best way is to find a way to change it from being a compulsive thing to something you can savor and enjoy (for instance, I like chocolate and found dark chocolate that I enjoy more than eating a bunch of milk chocolate where I can get a lot more of it for the same price).

 

[Shmee]

Ok thanks, probably isn't for me then. Hopefully supply and competitive options will improve over time.

 

[cytg111]

Well it looks like it has some positive side effects, protects the hearth beyond what a normal weight reduction would do.
Its not like it magically burns more fat off your body, it regulates your blood sugar and thus appetite so you simply dont eat as much, small portions, and dont crave that sugar spike you get from a cookie. Looks like it has an effect on alcohol consumption too.

Its hopefully not a surprise to anyone that if you return to what you were doing before, you will return to before-state when you discontinue the product.

So don’t discontinue it, the Danish tax system needs your contributions

 

[yottabit]

It works but it stops working once you stop taking it meaning unless you can afford to stay on it regularly you'll just end up yo-yoing in weight (which will bring its own health issues), and quite a few people end up gaining more weight than they had before they started using it after they stop. Its also expensive (thousands per month) and almost guaranteed to not be covered by insurance, and would only for probably severe diabetics that have already tried multiple other avenues. Well unless you're paying so much in insurance that you could basically afford it without insurance. Its also hard to come by because of assholes who do not need it buying up the supply (and so unless you are a pretty severe diabetic, please don't fuck over other people by trying to get on this stuff, although you should discuss it with your doctor), restricting its availability, which makes it more expensive. I have a strong hunch insurance will be much more likely to push you to something else (even surgery) as it should be cheaper. I actually wonder if insurance companies might resort to paying for liposuction to try and save costs from people trying to get on this stuff, as that will probably be cheaper.

It also has quite a few side effects, but for most people the benefits (health for the people that actually need it, and for those that don't the weight loss for beauty standards) will outweigh those. So far the side effects are pretty typical of many drugs and/or diet changes, gastrointestinal issues, nausea (essentially that's how this stuff works, it makes you nauseous a lot which makes you lose your appetite so you eat less), and the like.



Yes yes, if only someone had thought of that, we could've solved this whole issue! Hell imagine all the famines that wouldn't have mattered if we simply could will ourselves to eat less! Yes that's hyperbole but I'm over this "fat people just need to eat less" shit that ignores a multitude of other factors. Even most healthy people find maintaining their weight to be difficult, and I know a shitload of people that were very healthy by eating healthy and exercising that hurt themselves doing the latter and end up having issues from then on being healthy just in their diet. And that ignores how things big and small (poverty, life events like losing a loved one, and many many other) can impact this.

Also, eating less will have health complications. Anytime you make changes to your diet brings health complications. Often the benefits can outweigh the negatives, but acting like there's no downside is just false. Although if you're supporting fairly gradual changes that can mitigate a lot of that.

Further, food restrictions won't work long term for the vast majority of people, which means they will just end up gaining the weight back, sometimes more, and that's not even the people that end up with eating disorders from doing such. Saying just eat less is pointless. Its like you going "just use less gas" as the fix for climate change. Sure, it will work some and have benefits, but acting like its just that simple is so overly simplistic that you're not actually offering anything meaningful in this discussion.

Please enlighten me as to how a gradual caloric deficit of 250-500 calories per day can have negative health consequences

Or why it won’t work for most people

Also why “using less gas” won’t work. Because my ego needs an F-350 dually for my 120 mile commute and a Prius won’t work?

 

[nakedfrog]

Yes yes, if only someone had thought of that, we could've solved this whole issue! Hell imagine all the famines that wouldn't have mattered if we simply could will ourselves to eat less! Yes that's hyperbole but I'm over this "fat people just need to eat less" shit that ignores a multitude of other factors. Even most healthy people find maintaining their weight to be difficult, and I know a shitload of people that were very healthy by eating healthy and exercising that hurt themselves doing the latter and end up having issues from then on being healthy just in their diet. And that ignores how things big and small (poverty, life events like losing a loved one, and many many other) can impact this.

Also, eating less will have health complications. Anytime you make changes to your diet brings health complications. Often the benefits can outweigh the negatives, but acting like there's no downside is just false. Although if you're supporting fairly gradual changes that can mitigate a lot of that.

Further, food restrictions won't work long term for the vast majority of people, which means they will just end up gaining the weight back, sometimes more, and that's not even the people that end up with eating disorders from doing such. Saying just eat less is pointless. Its like you going "just use less gas" as the fix for climate change. Sure, it will work some and have benefits, but acting like its just that simple is so overly simplistic that you're not actually offering anything meaningful in this discussion.

Calm your fucking tits, dude, it's certainly worth fucking TRYING to eat less before getting a prescription for this stuff. I'm not speaking from ignorance here, I lost 140 lbs and have kept it off for years. A lot of people can just cut out sugary beverages and get good results from that, etc. Or stop eating stuff with a full cup of ranch, have 3/4 cup instead. You're acting like it doesn't work for everyone right away so there's no point in even trying.

 

[Stokely]

I really wish the left would stop obsessing over Trumps physical characteristics. I get he's an easy target but it's gotten pretty old.

Not that I'm "the left" and can't speak for them, but I'd say part of it has to do with the fact that he belittles others for their physical characteristics. Like disabled people in wheelchairs, and dead WWII soldiers in graveyards. Similarly, I'd normally not care if someone wants to fuck whoever they want, but when it's some moral wanker who screeches about sinners all the time getting caught, yeah they deserve scorn.

But no doubt Trump's danger if you are not a maga type is not in his gross appearance, but in his mindset and policies. He could look like prime Brad Pitt (or pick your celebrity) and I'd still detest everything about him just as much.

Democrats need to have a pretty simple ad campaign: This is the man who repealed Roe v Wade. Repeat on a loop. It's pretty much the only hope that Biden has. You can see even Desantis trying to avoid the issue now that they are the dog that caught the car.

--

re: weight loss drugs

I've said it before but considering the array of tech and money aimed directly at making people fat slobs (armies of "flavor scientists" employed by food companies and massive ad budgets), maybe it's time to fight fire with fire. Not that these uber-expensive shots will help the people that need it most, the poor people that lack access to decent food in the first place. I personally considered trying it for a period as I am good at maintaining but bad at losing in the first place! But I'm a cheap bastard.

 

[Muse]

Nah, unless you're overeating them to the point of it being problematic. You can make healthier cookies or work on a way to control portion. And almost all people if they give up something like that will just replace it with something else equally if not more problematic if they go full abstinence only anyway. Just find healthier ways to enjoy something you clearly do. Best way is to find a way to change it from being a compulsive thing to something you can savor and enjoy (for instance, I like chocolate and found dark chocolate that I enjoy more than eating a bunch of milk chocolate where I can get a lot more of it for the same price).

I NEVER buy cookies anymore, haven't for many years. My volunteer organization, at monthly staff meetings used to pass around opened packages of cookies and I'd take one or two... fine. But I do make a cookie recipe that I developed myself and have made possibly 2000 or more times. It's low fat and low sugar compared to others. It's basically banana bread with a variety of chopped nuts added and portioned into tiny cookies that I flip over after 1/2 bake and continue baking to crispness. I call them Banana Bread Cookies. They're best eaten soon after removal from oven.

Portion control I'm really into.