Obviously anecdotal, but from what I’ve seen and heard it actually does. Those using it have almost no cravings, you can stick their favourite snack in their face and they’ll politely decline.
some anorexic person gets weight loss drugs instead of a referral to a psychiatrist,
The person doing the snacking is addicted to a feeling usually associated with eating because of a hormone that your stomach releases which makes you hungry. (Ghrelin iirc) This medication on either ocunteracts that or helps it’s counterpart, leptin, which signals satiation.
Usually people with severe obesity have those signalings all fucked up.
But like with smokers, nicotine patches will help people quit, but some just like still smoke on them and don’t even reduce, you know? Those people are more addicted to smoking than dependent on the nicotine, really.
Similar thing goes for food addiction. It can be either or, addiction or “dependence” (I put it in airquotes because it’s still not “really” required but your body certainly will make you think it is because it doesn’t know we live in modern times and a bit of fasting is completely safe).
Usually it’s a mix of both, obviously, like with everyone. But if the psychological component is far larger, than these sort of meds perhaps won’t help as much, and you’d need something combined with therapy perhaps.
but slim and shapely.
Yeah eh, if they’re being cautious and abiding by the instructions on the medications, I guess why not.
Obesity in the 50’s was more like 10-15%, today it’s closer to 35%, but 40 is close enough.
Interestingly, the spike started in the mid-1980’s, timed too closely to the low-fat craze to not make me suspicious, especially since that adds up metabolically.
Eating sugar doesn’t either unless you’re at a calorie surplus but yeah sugar does mess with you hormonally in a way that you’re more likely to put yourself at a calorie surplus vs fats.
Pretty sure fat digests pretty easily for humans, while we are omnivores we lean more towards the carnivore side of things. Remember our big evolutionary advantage is our ability to throw things good and just keep walking, persistence hunting was our big fuck you advantage.
Another advantage that we developed later on is our ability to seamlessly shift from small to big team organizations, sometimes working without any apparent hierarchy. Gobleki Tepe is one of the prime examples of prehistoric cities
Too bad the world as a whole kinda stuck with super rigid top down hierarchies for the past 500 years
So imagine this but with a 40% obesity rate.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00404-9
The 1950s can still happen!
Weight loss drugs don’t immunise you against food though.
And usually the people who are on drugs for weight loss arent exactly close to the figure represented.
The new ones like ozempic literally kill your cravings and desire for snacking, so in a way they do.
You’d be surprised at the figures of some of the people I see at the doctor’s for weight loss drugs.
In a way, they attempt to moderate the hormones that usually are the cause behind snacking. But it won’t eliminate habit.
I don’t think I would, but if some anorexic person gets weight loss drugs instead of a referral to a psychiatrist, somethings gone wrong.
Obviously anecdotal, but from what I’ve seen and heard it actually does. Those using it have almost no cravings, you can stick their favourite snack in their face and they’ll politely decline.
Didn’t mean it that way, but slim and shapely.
I mean, it will help eliminate the habit.
The person doing the snacking is addicted to a feeling usually associated with eating because of a hormone that your stomach releases which makes you hungry. (Ghrelin iirc) This medication on either ocunteracts that or helps it’s counterpart, leptin, which signals satiation.
Usually people with severe obesity have those signalings all fucked up.
But like with smokers, nicotine patches will help people quit, but some just like still smoke on them and don’t even reduce, you know? Those people are more addicted to smoking than dependent on the nicotine, really.
Similar thing goes for food addiction. It can be either or, addiction or “dependence” (I put it in airquotes because it’s still not “really” required but your body certainly will make you think it is because it doesn’t know we live in modern times and a bit of fasting is completely safe).
Usually it’s a mix of both, obviously, like with everyone. But if the psychological component is far larger, than these sort of meds perhaps won’t help as much, and you’d need something combined with therapy perhaps.
Yeah eh, if they’re being cautious and abiding by the instructions on the medications, I guess why not.
Obesity in the 50’s was more like 10-15%, today it’s closer to 35%, but 40 is close enough.
Interestingly, the spike started in the mid-1980’s, timed too closely to the low-fat craze to not make me suspicious, especially since that adds up metabolically.
Yeah, many products had (and still have) reduced fat but added sugar. Sugar belongs in desserts in my opinion. Eating fat doesn’t make you fat.
Eating sugar doesn’t either unless you’re at a calorie surplus but yeah sugar does mess with you hormonally in a way that you’re more likely to put yourself at a calorie surplus vs fats.
Pretty sure fat digests pretty easily for humans, while we are omnivores we lean more towards the carnivore side of things. Remember our big evolutionary advantage is our ability to throw things good and just keep walking, persistence hunting was our big fuck you advantage.
Another advantage that we developed later on is our ability to seamlessly shift from small to big team organizations, sometimes working without any apparent hierarchy. Gobleki Tepe is one of the prime examples of prehistoric cities
Too bad the world as a whole kinda stuck with super rigid top down hierarchies for the past 500 years