Speaking of Fat People: The National Association to Advance FAT Acceptance(NAAFA).

[ötzi]

He was celibate and ate a lot of fries. Which lead to which is the question.

[dan_pdx]

no love?


sad.

I mean, there was _some_, but no fries involved

[XXX-er]

When I loved in Japan in the 90s, Lotteria was still frying in beef tallow or at least, some kind of animal fat. TBH, I always thought they tasted like bacon. They were good but even in my twenties, a little too savory to eat very many.

Fruediuan slip eh ?

they do have those districts where you can get any kind of love you want and

BTW Japan is WAY ahead of America in life expectancy on the health file in spite of the beef tallow

Today an old bro was telling me about how he told a mutual friend who was the main Yogini in town he had been going to uni where he did a lot of Cunnilingus yoga which I supose is like Kundalini only different

[The AD]

?
Are you unaware of the ongoing discussion of how Ozempic users weren’t aware that once they got their weight down they might be lifelong injectors of it?

Sounds like some pretty shitty doctors prescribing it if they didn't inform their patients of this.

[XXX-er]

It took me 30 seconds to google all the info on ozempic side effects including the part where you gain all the weight back

[Boissal]

It took me 30 seconds to google all the info on ozempic side effects including the part where you gain all the weight back

The worst part about the weight gain on discontinuation is that people aren't gaining the same type of weight back. All GLP1RA induce some loss of lean mass along with the fat mass. That's where the Ozempic face comes from, people lose all your subcutaneous fat and also some facial muscles. On discontinuation of treatment people regain all the weight but not the lean mass, that gets replaced by fat which is much easier to put on that muscle. That's the biggest issue with long term use and discontinuation. There's also some loss of bone density but that hasn't been correlated with actual clinical consequences.

The hard part with GLP1RA treatment is that they can only get you to lose so much weight. That number is dose dependent, and so are the side effects. People shed weight fast and tolerate the drug well but plateau and want to get on a higher dose. Side effects show up, they discontinue treatment. Side effects don't show up, they want an even higher dose. Rinse and repeat until they hit their limit and come off. Metabolic setpoints are very hard to break through, and GLP1RA can't reset them. Lots of research on combination treatments at the moment but the biology is heinously complicated.

[halliday]

Sounds like some pretty shitty doctors prescribing it if they didn't inform their patients of this.

My wife is on zepbound now. She is 100 pounds overweight from making bad choices and kicking the can down the road. She's 62. She and her sisters are on it because they are too lazy to do the work required to basically eat a healthy diet and get some exercise. My wife told me "I did intermittent fasting for over a year and it didn't work". If you do something to the human body it will respond. If you eat potato chips and drink Coke while doing nothing else your body will respond. If you do intermittent fasting and remain faithful to the process your body will respond. High blood pressure, over weight, bad hip, back pain, sleep apnea, if I had half of these problems there would be war drums beating. I told her if this is the best advice her doctor gave her she should think about getting a new doctor. When I lived in NJ I had a doctor (middle 60s, from India) who would keep after me like nobody's business and if I wanted to explore a non prescription drug solution to a problem she would be on board with thorough maintenance and check ups. Im going to be 56 pretty soon and quit smoking, dropped 15 pounds, and take no prescription medication, and have a strict eating regimen and cycling regimen. It takes work everyday. Every fucking day. If you put in the time and effort then you will be healthy. If you inject dope into your guy you might likely lose weight but are you any healthier? Have you come to a conclusion on what the problems are? The answer is no. Weight and health are behavioral issues. The kicker is now Im on the hook for $450.00 a month for zepbound for my wife. My revenge is, when she's jabbing that shit into her gut, asking her if she is trying out for the USPS cycling squad. She tells me to go fuck myself. I laugh. Eat right, get plenty of exercise, repeat.

[Cisco Kid]

What do you believe is the reason that you have to work so hard and long just to be the proper weight and I don't?

edited

[The AD]

On the topic of doctors, my wife and I both recently went in for physicals and she told me the doctor asked her if she wanted her weight taken. They didn't ask me and I just assumed it was something that was done 100% of the time. I find it a bit strange this is considered optional now.

[halliday]

Every person is different. In my previous job I was drilling from 1800-0600 for weeks on end and very active. Ive been super active my whole life. When I took the job I currently have my daily activity level decreased dramatically and I gained weight. I need to fill in the blanks with activity wherever I can find it along with adjusting when and what I eat. Its easy. Im not the type of person to sit in front of a computer or on the phone all day and think things are going to be the same. My brother in law is a naturally skinny person. His wife is fat. My mother (78 years old) is a life long runner, my father is fit because he eats right and exercises, my wife and her family ten towards fat as a lifestyle choice as they age. Different strokes for different folks.

[californiagrown]

On the topic of doctors, my wife and I both recently went in for physicals and she told me the doctor asked her if she wanted her weight taken. They didn't ask me and I just assumed it was something that was done 100% of the time. I find it a bit strange this is considered optional now.

I heard something on NPR a while back about how measuring a patients weight actually led to worse health outcomes because of the associated stress, anxiety and fixation on weight above other health factors. I would have to assume that this study was mostly geared at overweight people, and likely women as they are the most likely to suffer from eating disorders.

Every person is different. In my previous job I was drilling from 1800-0600 for weeks on end and very active. Ive been super active my whole life. When I took the job I currently have my daily activity level decreased dramatically and I gained weight. I need to fill in the blanks with activity wherever I can find it along with adjusting when and what I eat. Its easy. Im not the type of person to sit in front of a computer or on the phone all day and think things are going to be the same. My brother in law is a naturally skinny person. His wife is fat. My mother (78 years old) is a life long runner, my father is fit because he eats right and exercises, my wife and her family ten towards fat as a lifestyle choice as they age. Different strokes for different folks.

I fundamentally do not understand, why people dont understand your weight is a simple calculation of calories-in vs calories-out. Point blank, simple. You get it- "I used to be super active at my job, but now im a desk jockey... I need to adjust my diet and make an effort to move more". It really is that simple.

[Boissal]

I fundamentally do not understand, why people dont understand your weight is a simple calculation of calories-in vs calories-out. Point blank, simple. You get it- "I used to be super active at my job, but now im a desk jockey... I need to adjust my diet and make an effort to move more". It really is that simple.

It's not that simple. The above works for weight gain but not for weight loss. Decreasing caloric input can only get you so far once you're overweight, the body will fight you every step of the way to hand on to those fat stores. Yes, there is anecdotal evidence of profound weight loss with nothing but caloric restriction, but on average this is more of a one way street than we realize and shedding weight is much harder than putting it on. All fat isn't created equal, and some fat is damn near impossible to lose.

[californiagrown]

It's not that simple. The above works for weight gain but not for weight loss. Decreasing caloric input can only get you so far once you're overweight, the body will fight you every step of the way to hand on to those fat stores. Yes, there is anecdotal evidence of profound weight loss with nothing but caloric restriction, but on average this is more of a one way street than we realize and shedding weight is much harder than putting it on. All fat isn't created equal, and some fat is damn near impossible to lose.

No. Holy shit, this is what kills me. You literally CANNOT maintain or gain weight if you are burning more calories than you take in. PERIOD.


Please, explain to me how it is possible to maintain or gain weight while taking in less calories than you burn.

[GoldMember]

No. Holy shit, this is what kills me. You literally CANNOT maintain or gain weight if you are burning more calories than you take in. PERIOD.


Please, explain to me how it is possible to maintain or gain weight while taking in less calories than you burn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/welln...153013abaaa4f1

[XXX-er]

skied with a guy in Niseko who was 100lbs overweight and he said to me

" the BMI doesn't work for me "

[californiagrown]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/welln...153013abaaa4f1

That article argues against the conservation of energy? One of the basic principles of physics? Unlikely.

Im paywalled, but id wager that article talks about metabolic changes ("calories-out") that occur when the "calories-in" portion of the equation is reduced.


You want to know why ozempic works, and why gastric bypass works? Cause people eat less calories on it. Period. Thats it, thats all. It makes you feel full quicker and kills your hunger. If you ingest less calories than you burn, you lose weight. It is that simple. That is the fundamental truth of weight loss, weight gain, and weight maintenance. The game is to play with the two variables available- (1) how many calories you give your body and (2) how many calories you can get your body to burn. But you cannot get away from the basic rule of the game that your weight will go down if Calories-in < Calories-out.

[Viva]

No, it's not an energy balance issue.

The laws of thermodynamics do not apply to metabolic syndrome.

[californiagrown]

No, it's not an energy balance issue.

The laws of thermodynamics do not apply to metabolic syndrome.

How? How can a person ingest less calories than they burn, and maintain or gain weight?

[Cisco Kid]

No. Holy shit, this is what kills me. You literally CANNOT maintain or gain weight if you are burning more calories than you take in. PERIOD.


Please, explain to me how it is possible to maintain or gain weight while taking in less calories than you burn.

You missed the part.or maybe don't know, about the physiological differences between a person wanting to shed a few pounds and someone who could use to loose 50-100.

[californiagrown]

You missed the part.or maybe don't know, about the physiological differences between a person wanting to shed a few pounds and someone who could use to loose 50-100.

The methods vary, but fundamentally it comes down to simple conservation of energy. Diet is the "calories-in" portion, and exercise/metabolism-hormones/etc are the "calories-out" portion. If you are losing weight, its because you are burning more calories than you absorb, and if you are gaining weight it is because you are absorbing more calories than you burn. No getting away from it.

[Dantheman]

The worst part about the weight gain on discontinuation is that people aren't gaining the same type of weight back. All GLP1RA induce some loss of lean mass along with the fat mass. That's where the Ozempic face comes from, people lose all your subcutaneous fat and also some facial muscles. On discontinuation of treatment people regain all the weight but not the lean mass, that gets replaced by fat which is much easier to put on that muscle. That's the biggest issue with long term use and discontinuation. There's also some loss of bone density but that hasn't been correlated with actual clinical consequences.

To be fair, this is isn't unique to weight loss with GLP1RAs. Normal caloric restriction also causes significant loss of lean mass if people don't resistance train and eat a high protein diet.

Lots of research on combination treatments at the moment but the biology is heinously complicated.

This is already happening. Tirzepatide (Mounjaro, Zepbound) has potent agonist activity at GIP and GLP-1 receptors. AFAIK, the next generation of these drugs (already in early trials) are also direct glucagon receptor agonists.

No. Holy shit, this is what kills me. You literally CANNOT maintain or gain weight if you are burning more calories than you take in. PERIOD.


Please, explain to me how it is possible to maintain or gain weight while taking in less calories than you burn.

If you lock someone in a metabolic ward and control their food intake to maintain a caloric deficit they will lose weight, period. This holds true for all macro schemes if total protein is controlled. However, there is a reduction in BMR as weight drops so weight loss becomes non-linear. Someone's X kcal/day deficit at their starting weight will lead to Y pounds of weight loss that eventually becomes asymptotic as what was a deficit approaches maintenance calories. Further weight loss then requires additional caloric restriction to get back into a deficit and continue losing weight. But, psychologically people can only handle so much restriction, and physiologically when you lose a lot of weight your leptin drops to basically zero so you're constantly starving and miserable. I think that's what he's getting at.

Moving on, apropos to the season, studies show that most people actually maintain their weight for 10-11 months of the year, then gain several pounds over the holidays and never lose the holiday weight.

[Boissal]

No. Holy shit, this is what kills me. You literally CANNOT maintain or gain weight if you are burning more calories than you take in. PERIOD.
Please, explain to me how it is possible to maintain or gain weight while taking in less calories than you burn.

Gain weight? You won't. Maintain? You probably will, at least for a while. My point is that it's not as simple as caloric balance relating directly to weight. Fat isn't just some inert mass that grows when you eat too much and shrinks when you stop, it has its own biology with complex functions which interface with pretty much every biological process. I'm not going to dive into it, it's way too complex and broad a topic and I don't understand it well enough to explain it despite spending all day every day working on it. Obesity treatment has gone through a revolution in the past 10 years with the development of GLP1RA, but we're just scratching the surface in terms of understanding their mechanism of action and full potential. One thing we do know though is that it's not just about eating less...

You don't buy it? Facts don't care about what you believe. Continue telling yourself that people who aren't bootstrapping themselves into losing weight are just not trying hard enough. I'm sure you did your own research, how could you possibly be wrong?

[dunfree]

If you lock someone in a metabolic ward and control their food intake to maintain a caloric deficit they will lose weight, period. This holds true for all macro schemes if total protein is controlled. However, there is a reduction in BMR as weight drops so weight loss becomes non-linear. Someone's X kcal/day deficit at their starting weight will lead to Y pounds of weight loss that eventually becomes asymptotic as what was a deficit approaches maintenance calories. Further weight loss then requires additional caloric restriction to get back into a deficit and continue losing weight. But, psychologically people can only handle so much restriction, and physiologically when you lose a lot of weight your leptin drops to basically zero so you're constantly starving and miserable. I think that's what he's getting at.

Moving on, apropos to the season, studies show that most people actually maintain their weight for 10-11 months of the year, then gain several pounds over the holidays and never lose the holiday weight.

Does Holiday weight gain occur in the Southern Hemisphere as well?

[XXX-er]

even touring massive amounts I couldn't get below 160

then I got an E-bike and dropped a couple more lbs ... making a deal with the devil

[californiagrown]

Gain weight? You won't. Maintain? You probably will, at least for a while. My point is that it's not as simple as caloric balance relating directly to weight. Fat isn't just some inert mass that grows when you eat too much and shrinks when you stop, it has its own biology with complex functions which interface with pretty much every biological process. I'm not going to dive into it, it's way too complex and broad a topic and I don't understand it well enough to explain it despite spending all day every day working on it. Obesity treatment has gone through a revolution in the past 10 years with the development of GLP1RA, but we're just scratching the surface in terms of understanding their mechanism of action and full potential. One thing we do know though is that it's not just about eating less...

You don't buy it? Facts don't care about what you believe. Continue telling yourself that people who aren't bootstrapping themselves into losing weight are just not trying hard enough. I'm sure you did your own research, how could you possibly be wrong?

Can you describe a way to manipulate someones weight where you arent just fundamentally adjusting the caloric uptake, or the caloric output.


(besides amputation, or dehydration lol)