• Flamekebab@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Whilst I don’t disagree I would argue that it can be very useful because there are more moving parts to the equation. If it means someone can lose a load of weight to stave off diabetes and buy more time to build a healthier lifestyle then that’s arguably a good thing, as an example. Medicine is ultimately about buying time, after all.

      In my family’s case it meant we were not only able to have a child but to do so without IVF. My wife has indeed regained a load of weight but my daughter wouldn’t exist without it.

      An incremental step seems helpful from where I’m standing. What we’ve tried so far to deal with our collective weight problem hasn’t worked. Until we figure that out having something that helps buy a lot of people time and quality of life is a bad thing? I strongly disagree.

        • Flamekebab@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’m a bit more of a realist. If a solution has been given a fair attempt and doesn’t work then it’s not a solution:

          This also includes not relying on any medication to lose weight, which ultimately is avoiding the main issue at hand.

          This doesn’t achieve the goal. Effectively this boils down to “treat weight gain as a moral failing”. Let’s assume it is (I don’t think it is, but let’s just assume it is for the sake of this line of argument) then why haven’t we already solved it? The problem persists and is more prevalent than ever.

          Taking that approach does not achieve the desired results.

          Much like choosing not to look both ways before crossing a one-way street, being in the right doesn’t matter if the end result is the same.

          I am an existentialist and strongly believe that all people should take responsibility for their lives.

          The deck is stacked and people are playing the hands they’re dealt. Vast resources have been poured into fucking with people both chemically and psychologically to form poor eating habits, addictions, and limit economic choices. Personal responsibility is of course important but things are a smidge more complex than that.

          It is common for women to carry a little weight after birth.

          Just had to comment on this bit because of how hilariously awkward it is. My wife’s a fat lass. It’s not a secret. She finds it hilarious how uncomfortable people are about it. She wants to lose some weight for her long term health, not for aesthetic reasons. Last year she lost 36 kg, averaging about a kilo a week. Before that she tried various things but her body would essentially spend all day screaming at her that she was starving so it took a tremendous psychological toll whilst resulting in barely any loss in weight.

          Using your line of argument (and removing the moral failing side) perhaps my wife lacks the personal responsibility to lose weight effectively.

          Okay. So then what?

          Are we to simply accept that a shortened life expectency and infertility are inevitable?

          That doesn’t seem a good way to get a population healthier.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Using your line of argument (and removing the moral failing side) perhaps my wife lacks the personal responsibility to lose weight effectively.

            Okay. So then what?

            Are we to simply accept that a shortened life expectency and infertility are inevitable?

            That doesn’t seem a good way to

            Obesity is not a moral failing, it is a lifetime of incorrect dietary advice and encouragement.

            Low carbohydrate, ketogenic, diets have all of the benefits of GLP-1 drugs without any of the downsides. TLDR: The big problem with obesity in the world today, and diabetes, is people’s immense carbohydrate intake, coupled with processed food. These two things alone account for metabolic dysfunction in the population.

            What that means for real people, is they can join a health program like virta health if they need support, change their diet slowly to be lower carbohydrate, monitor their biometrics, have support groups to talk to to change their habits, see and celebrate the results they get from a new eating pattern

            Food is actually more powerful than medicine. We have to be deliberate about the food we take on.

            • Flamekebab@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Literally the first line of my comment that you quoted is me stating that it’s not a moral failing. I feel like I couldn’t have been any clearer on that front.

              I’m sorry, but it just irks me and makes me immediately unnecessarily hostile.

              Anyway, trying to simmer down a bit…

              I would absolutely agree that better nutrition is key. However the kinds of systemic and personal change needed will take decades to have an impact on a societal level.

              Long term solutions are crucial but having things that work in the short and medium term to pave the way make it a lot easier to reach the long term solutions.

              Taking my own example, let’s say such a programme were to work for my wife - how long would that take? Would it be fast enough to beat menopause? She’s 38 now and this solution improved her quality of life dramatically and is helping us not repeat the mistakes of her parents with our own child.

              We’re not looking for a quick fix, but a leg up. If we can improve people’s perceptions of themselves it’s a lot easier to get buy in for further lifestyle improvements. If one is already dramatically overweight it’s much easier to be defeatist!

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Sorry, didn’t mean any offense.

                having things that work in the short and medium term to pave the way make it a lot easier to reach the long term solutions.

                Ketogenic eating works today, right now, for individuals

                let’s say such a programme were to work for my wife - how long would that take? Would it be fast enough to beat menopause? She’s 38 now and this solution improved her quality of life dramatically and is helping us not repeat the mistakes of her parents with our own child.

                Depends how strict they can be, 1 to 2 kg per month is normal, women tend to hit a plateau earlier on ketogenic eating, where their body goes through a period of recomposition where the weight doesn’t reduce, but the fat is still being burned. So it’s important to evaluate these interventions not just by overall weight, but waistline, or body composition scanners if you have access to one

                We’re not looking for a quick fix, but a leg up. If we can improve people’s perceptions of themselves it’s a lot easier to get buy in for further lifestyle improvements. If one is already dramatically overweight it’s much easier to be defeatist!

                Completely agree. The important thing is to provide people an optimistic path. I’m a big fan of programs like virta because they provide lots of different modalities to meet people where they get the most motivation and feedback to stay on track.

                I have looked at a few studies, and ketogenic diets outperform the GLP-1 drugs in total weight loss, and in muscle retention in every study I’ve looked at.