3 ms·

I wouldn't try these until they've been studied further: https://peterattiamd.com/the-downside-of-glp-1-receptor-agonists/ https://peterattiamd.com/the-downside

• gruez 4y ago
  From the linked article: >Among these patients, lean mass accounted for approximately 39% of total weight loss – substantially higher than ideal. In a substudy of 178 patients from the SUSTAIN 8 trial on semaglutide as a diabetes treatment, the average proportion of lean mass loss was nearly identical at 40%, despite lower doses and less total weight loss than in the STEP 1 trial. [...] Or in other words, 60% of the weight loss was in fat. The article paints this as concerning, but doesn't provide justification why. Sure, it'd be better to have 0% lean body mass loss, but how does 40% stack compared to calorie deficit diets? The mechanism of action behind the drugs is to cause you to eat less, and if the side effects are consistent with eating less, I don't see why people should be extra concerned.
  • exfatloss 4y ago
    Also from the article: > Though a certain amount of lean loss is inevitable with significant weight reduction (usually about 25% of total weight loss) The justification is provided: this is nearly double the lean body mass loss usually seen in drastic weight loss. Yes, 0% is impossible, but this is worryingly high. It might be OK in younger individuals who have a ton of fat mass to lose, and they might gain any lean body mass back. But in older individuals that are already having a hard time exercising, it's unlikely that lean body mass will ever come back. Makes me think these drugs should probably be a measure of last resort. Unless more studies defuse this.