• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

There's also the fact that, again for the first time in human history, companies are literally giving top scientists high-paying jobs in order to create the most hyper-palatable foods in history full of addictive properties like Doritos. And fast-food companies target poor people with high-calorie, poor-nutrition foods that are super quick to make and taste delicious, on a dollar value menu.

Of course, I'm sure Fly's heroes of personal responsibility are going to be quick to save the world by cautioning people against eating all these hyper-palatable junk foods with proper messagi -- oh shit.





jsIhvI0.jpeg


js3Uiz7.jpeg
 
Wayward DP said:
are obesity pills an effective tool in the tool box if they're only effective when you are taking them? (which is my impression currently - correct me if I'm wrong on this)

I ask seriously, as someone without a ton of knowledge in these areas.

like, it's great that these pills can help folks lose weight. but do they all put it back on once they stop taking it? if so, what are the long-term effects of using these types of medications? and is an obesity pill the best solution?

wasn't Ozempic originally a treatment for diabetes, but now being widely used for weight loss?

I guess I just have a lot of questions
Click to expand...
And viagra was for high blood pressure.

Obesity is a massive problem. If this helps it will make people more healthy, and save money.

Not sure about regaining weight but that is true of most diets as well. It suppresses appetite so once that is no longer suppressed you will see an increase I'd assume.

But let's think that through. Option 1. You are 200 pounds. You lose 50 pounds. And then gain 50 pounds. Still at 200.
Option 2. You are 200 pounds. You gain 50 pounds. You are now at 250.

Yes I know it is not quite that linear and of course you need to monitor for side effects, longterm issues, etc but the physical health and mental health improvements will be massive.
 
axlsalinger said:
There's also the fact that, again for the first time in human history, companies are literally giving top scientists high-paying jobs in order to create the most hyper-palatable foods in history full of addictive properties like Doritos. And fast-food companies target poor people with high-calorie, poor-nutrition foods that are super quick to make and taste delicious, on a dollar value menu.

Of course, I'm sure Fly's heroes of personal responsibility are going to be quick to save the world by cautioning people against eating all these hyper-palatable junk foods with proper messagi -- oh shit.





jsIhvI0.jpeg


js3Uiz7.jpeg
Click to expand...

That look on his face tells you just how aware he is that he's sold his soul to be a part of this.
 
FlyGuy said:
Agree, lets spend government money on figuring out why Europe bans so many substances that go into food that we don't. Let's purify our food and water sources. Let's change lifestyle eating habits. Let's incentive cooking and eating at home and find ways to make groceries less expensive.
Click to expand...

So more communism? What happened to freedom?

On a serious note the portion sizes at American restaurants are hilarious
 
FlyGuy said:
Tax dollars paying for fatties who don't put in the work to educate themselves or dedication to move to lose weight is absolutely abhorrent to me.
Click to expand...

It will save money though.

Less illness, more productivity.

I assume you think the govt shouldn't fun anti smoking drugs (the patch), etc either?
 
worm said:
And viagra was for high blood pressure.

Obesity is a massive problem. If this helps it will make people more healthy, and save money.

Not sure about regaining weight but that is true of most diets as well. It suppresses appetite so once that is no longer suppressed you will see an increase I'd assume.

But let's think that through. Option 1. You are 200 pounds. You lose 50 pounds. And then gain 50 pounds. Still at 200.
Option 2. You are 200 pounds. You gain 50 pounds. You are now at 250.

Yes I know it is not quite that linear and of course you need to monitor for side effects, longterm issues, etc but the physical health and mental health improvements will be massive.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. Even in that scenario where a person is using ozempic to basically yo yo in body weight between 150-200 pounds, that's still way healthier than a 150 pound frame rocketing up to 250. The data I've seen shows that about a kg a month is the standard weight loss. That means just under 2 yrs of ozempic gets someone from 200 to 150 pounds. Probably the same amount of time to go back to 200 and do it over again. That's a ~4 yr cycle and you have to assume that even if this was cyclical for a large % of people who take it, more and more would make smart lifestyle changes on their 2nd and 3rd trips around the track to reduce the yo yo-ing even if they don't eliminate it completely. Like, instead of letting themselves to get to 200lbs multiple times, they catch themselves at 175, take it for a year and maybe change some eating, add some physical activity, etc, etc.
 
axlsalinger said:
Ozempic helps the body secrete less glucagon (which makes blood sugar go up), and make more insulin. The main effect is that it significantly reduces appetite, and also causes the body to digest food slower.

The end result is that people eat a lot less while taking these drugs, thus leading to weight loss. And the reduction in blood sugar helps with diabetes.

Yes absolutely, lifestyle changes would be a much better way to combat obesity than taking a drug. How's that been working out? Diabesity is an epidemic. It's just really, really fucking hard for people to lose weight naturally in this society, where food is available 24 hours a day and junk food is delicious and cheap.

This drug has been life-changing for a lot of people, and has made the impossible, possible.

It takes forever to lose large amounts of weight, so it's extremely difficult for obese people. Lifestyle changes aren't effective enough. These drugs are absurdly expensive, so the government helping bring the costs down is a good thing. But we do need to monitor the long-term health benefits, and create programs to help wean people off them once the weight has been lost.

Problem 1 is that when you lose a large amount of weight, a certain percentage is going to be muscle, which is one point Fly made which is correct. This can be mitigated with exercise and weight lifting. Problem 2 is that people do tend to start gaining weight back once they come off the drugs, which is not because medical professionals are secretly satan-worshippers, but for reasons which should be fucking obvious. Obese people who have struggled for years to lose weight really do need to understand that this drug is like a miracle helping them finally do it, but they absolutely 100% need to change their lifestyle to keep the weight off.

Problem 3 is that non-obese people who shouldn't be on these drugs are taking them for cosmetic reasons.

Problem 4 is the side effects and long-term health questions. From what I know, the short-term side effects are minimal, really, compared to the benefits. The long-term effect of these drugs is still largely unknown. They have been studied for over a decade. There is some evidence it can lead to certain types of cancer.

Some more info in a relatively short article here:

hub.jhu.edu

The pros, cons, and unknowns of popular weight-loss drugs

Are in-demand drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy safe and effective? A Johns Hopkins expert explains
hub.jhu.edu hub.jhu.edu
Click to expand...

Problem 3 is not really a problem with the drug..more a society issue and mental health issue / confidence.
 
Preston said:
His take is mostly an emotional one and he's not thinking like the conservative business man he claims to be. "I work hard to stay in shape, we shouldn't be giving people shortcuts to get healthy!"

It's purely emotional thinking with rage and anger at the forefront.
Click to expand...

It's the exact opposite of his take on student loan forgiveness though, where a topic he is effected by has very similar systemic pressures that create debt and others without debt frown upon government assistance towards.

The only difference is one is a problem for him, and one isn't. My problems are important and someone should help me, fuck you and your problems, you just need to try harder and be more committed to solving your problems.

Clownshoes.
 
I’m pretty thin and travel light, where the fuck is my permanent airfare discount

I never use parks for anything. I deserve a tax rebate.
 
This is the problem (one of many) that MAGA's like FlyGuy has: they see the cost of everything but the value of nothing unless or until it impacts them personally. They have no human empathy. They exist like reptiles who have no feelings, just appetites.

America is going down the shitter because at some point it stopped being a nation of 346 million people and became 346 million independent nations all out to take care of numero uno and fuck everyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top