Ozempic, GLP-1 and other modern diabetes / weight loss medications

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,611
10,101
113
38
That's fair. Though Hemsworth does the dehydration routine before scenes, it has been reported.

Someone like Kumail Nanjani though, the speed with which he saw that change I have a hard time believing there wasn't some gear involved.
1 million percent, when his whole jaw changed it’s a pretty dead giveaway
 

Cloned4Life

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 5, 2006
3,606
3,366
113
That's fair. Though Hemsworth does the dehydration routine before scenes, it has been reported, which enhances it to a degree.

Someone like Kumail Nanjani though, the speed with which he saw that change I have a hard time believing there wasn't some gear involved.


Some interesting insight here into the celebrity training world.

For the most part, I do enjoy Dr. Mike’s content and his evidence/science-based approach to fitness, etc.
 

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
67,649
63,712
113
Not exactly sure.
As long as you’re not in blood thinners and have no thyroid problems you’re fine. Like most supplements it’s not something you need as it’s an amino acid found in food but if you want to take it or if it’s in something else it’s fine.

Most likely you’re just going to have more expensive urine
Is that what was the main ingredient in what was just labeled as amino acids back in the 90s?

If so, the fluorescent yellow urine is one cool side effect. Don’t need lights to pee at night.
 

CloniesForLife

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 22, 2015
15,609
21,022
113
Can almost guarantee they're on testosterone too.
Ehhhh maybe. Hemsworth more likely than Evans. Neither physique is necessarily not natty though. Like Gunner said genetically lucky and their job was to get as jacked as possible with all the best help available. Could've been but I wouldn't say 100% they are.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: BWRhasnoAC

Clone83

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2006
5,074
1,075
113
Interesting study. I think you may have to use or create an account to use the top link, to the Washington Post, although free. The second is the same article, free at MSN.

Read the whole thing.


What causes obesity? A major new study is upending common wisdom

"... The upshot is that “there is no effect of economic development on size-adjusted physical activity expenditure,” Pontzer says. In which case, the fundamental problem isn’t that we’re moving too little, meaning more exercise is unlikely to reduce obesity much.

What could, then? “Our analyses suggest that increased energy intake has been roughly 10 times more important than declining total energy expenditure in driving the modern obesity crisis,” the study authors write.

In other words, we’re eating too much. We may also be eating the wrong kinds of foods, the study also suggests. In a sub-analysis of the diets of some of the groups from both highly and less-developed nations, the scientists found a strong correlation between the percentage of daily diets that consists of “ultra-processed foods” — which the study’s authors define as “industrial formulations of five or more ingredients” — and higher body-fat percentages.

We are, to be blunt, eating too much and probably eating too much of the wrong foods. ... The findings don’t mean, though, that exercise is unimportant ..."
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScottyP

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,611
10,101
113
38
Interesting study. I think you may have to use or create an account to use the top link, to the Washington Post, although free. The second is the same article, free at MSN.

Read the whole thing.


What causes obesity? A major new study is upending common wisdom
Not a dig in you but more of the headline and article as in no way is this new information. This has been the common line of thought for at least a decade
 

CloniesForLife

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 22, 2015
15,609
21,022
113
Not a dig in you but more of the headline and article as in no way is this new information. This has been the common line of thought for at least a decade
Yeah I was going to post something similar. It's much much much easier to increase the calories in side of the equation most of the the calories out portion is pretty well set by Basal Metabolic Rate anyway. But pretty easy to consume an additional 1000 calories of food. Especially if you're eating low satiety but highly tasty and calorically dense food
 

ScottyP

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 24, 2007
5,264
7,653
113
Urbandale, IA
One benefit that these GLP-1s have is the reduction of food noise. I had never heard of that concept until recently, but it really hits home for me. I could just finish lunch an hour ago and already be thinking about my next meal. I've realized I think about food way more than a person should.

Another struggle I have is that my satiety signal seems like it is delayed a lot. I won't feel full until about an hour after I eat. I know that eating is slower is supposed to help, but I don't want to spend 2 hours eating. Is there a way to help with a delayed satiety signal?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Mr.G.Spot

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
59,507
74,248
113
Ankeny
One benefit that these GLP-1s have is the reduction of food noise. I had never heard of that concept until recently, but it really hits home for me. I could just finish lunch an hour ago and already be thinking about my next meal. I've realized I think about food way more than an a person should.

Another struggle I have is that my satiety signal seems like it is delayed a lot. I won't feel full until about an hour after I eat. I know that eating is slower is supposed to help, but I don't want to spend 2 hours eating. Is there a way to help with a delayed satiety signal?
The glp-1s are supposed to help with this so it might be a question of dose.

I believe this effect is stronger in some of the ones still under investigation like survodutide.
 

Gunnerclone

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2010
75,615
79,896
113
DSM

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
9,884
9,630
113
Rural U.S.A.
You read the chat wrong, that’s barely in the “overweight” catagory not close to obese. Also the chat is just a simple calculation, doesn’t take into account muscle vs fat
I didnt read it wrong. It was in the obese range. My doctor laughed a little when I pointed it out and said those charts dont apply to everyone. This was like 25 years ago. Have the charts changed?
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,611
10,101
113
38
I didnt read it wrong. It was in the obese range. My doctor laughed a little when I pointed it out and said those charts dont apply to everyone. This was like 25 years ago. Have the charts changed?
Are you sure you’re not getting overweight vs obese confused? I’m not aware of the charts changing for adults but 25 years ago I was in middle school so I guess it’s possible but I don’t think so
 

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
59,507
74,248
113
Ankeny
I didnt read it wrong. It was in the obese range. My doctor laughed a little when I pointed it out and said those charts dont apply to everyone. This was like 25 years ago. Have the charts changed?

I don't think obesity has changed on the bmi chart. In the late 90s they did extend overweight downward from 27.8 to 25.

If you were 6'3 210 you were at 26.2 so just slightly into overweight under the new (current) guidelines.

You would have had to be 240lbs to hit the obesity threshold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScottyP

Clone83

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2006
5,074
1,075
113
Not a dig in you but more of the headline and article as in no way is this new information. This has been the common line of thought for at least a decade
I wasn't aware before that relatively sedentary Americans "expend about the same number of total calories most days" as those who are anything but, such as "hunter-gatherers, herders, subsistence farmers, foragers and anyone else living in less-industrialized nations."
 

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
67,649
63,712
113
Not exactly sure.
One benefit that these GLP-1s have is the reduction of food noise. I had never heard of that concept until recently, but it really hits home for me. I could just finish lunch an hour ago and already be thinking about my next meal. I've realized I think about food way more than a person should.

Another struggle I have is that my satiety signal seems like it is delayed a lot. I won't feel full until about an hour after I eat. I know that eating is slower is supposed to help, but I don't want to spend 2 hours eating. Is there a way to help with a delayed satiety signal?
A portion could also be difference in jobs. I know when harvest/planting/ or any high activity time is upon me, many times I will have a light breakfast like a piece of toast and then not eat anything again until 10-11 pm at night. That meal isn’t even big, a lot of times a light sandwich and a handful of chips or carrots I may find.

When I have slow times, I find myself eating larger lunches and even throwing a snack in here and there. I have time for my mind to “wander” and I end up eating more. Makes me think that desk or jobs that don’t require your complete attention helps create the “food noise”
 
  • Informative
Reactions: ScottyP

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
9,884
9,630
113
Rural U.S.A.
Are you sure you’re not getting overweight vs obese confused? I’m not aware of the charts changing for adults but 25 years ago I was in middle school so I guess it’s possible but I don’t think so

I could be. Maybe I'm remembering different. It was 25 plus years ago. Even then, if you would've seen me, "overweight" would not be something that came to mind. Now? Probably so. I'm probably technically obese at 238. lol....
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlySpartan