3 ms·

Imagine being 250 lbs and feeling like you are starving constantly, despite eating a lot every day. You decide to lose weight. You do something you hate, like c

Imagine being 250 lbs and feeling like you are starving constantly, despite eating a lot every day. You decide to lose weight. You do something you hate, like calorie restriction and working out like a dog. You lose 80 lbs in 1 year. Bravo. Everyone tells you how great you look. You feel great. All that hard work was worth it. The fatness and a million other things really motivated you to do the hard work. I've done this a couple of times. Next day after hitting your goal, the starvation is still there. The desire to eat is still there. Hating working out is still there. But now you have to do this herculean effort every day not to get better. Not to lose weight. Just to maintain. Your brain wants you to gain 80 lbs and will never stop nagging you. Not on a good day. Not on a bad day. Then something really shitty happens in your life. Like it does for everyone. You slip. Eventually you start to gain back the weight. You just want to die. You feel like a failure. You hate yourself. That's the trick. Hitting goal weight the first time or two is relatively "easy". But you've achieved nothing if you aren't able to maintain weight loss. That's the failure of all approaches prior to these GLP1 and similar drugs. Having set the scene, now compare it to semaglutide. You have a drug that regulates your brain. Gets rid of the constant nagging to eat. You get normal brain. You lose weight. Now you have to pick, take a once a week drug for life to maintain, or do a herculean effort to fight the brain urges and work out to maintain. Which do you think will be more successful?

tgmatt 3y ago
This perfectly encapsulates my experience. I'm hesitant to ask for this medication because of side effects and because it's got a 2 year limit in my country, so I don't want to go through it all then have to stop and ultimately put it all back on. Shit sucks, bro.
- joedevon 3y ago
  Do some research into compound pharmacies as a worst picture backup. I know several people on them successfully. Peptides can't be patented. Semaglutide is a peptide. They are patenting the delivery mechanism AFAICT. As to sides, ramp up slowly. Maybe you won't have any. Also, there are new drugs coming that are even better. I'm sure the shortages and whatnot will be sorted out. The solution is out there. They can't stop this train.
  - reaperman 3y ago
    > Peptides can't be patented. This is...mostly wrong. Like both normal wrong, and "x-y problem" wrong. There is definitely some truth in there, but the full explanation would require an actual lawyer, because there's a LOT of layers of complication. Just so people don't have to simply take my word against yours, here's Jacob Sherkow, JD, a professor of law and medicine at the Illinois College of Medicine on the topic: > semaglutide that's "made, used, sold, offered to be sold, or imported into the United States is possibly an act of infringement, if Novo were to sue them" But this isn't just about patents -- that's the "x-y problem" that I was talking about. It may not be legal to import active ingredients of FDA-approved drugs. Most peptides (AOC-9604, BPC-157, Ibutamoren, Ipamorelin, etc) are "legal" because they're not considered drugs. Once they're FDA approved, they become not legal to import/re-sell unless you're a compounding pharmacy. It wouldn't generally be legal to import fexofenadine (OTC allergy medication), for example, even though it's not a controlled substance. Because importing non-FDA drugs is generally not legal unless you're a licensed part of the medical supply chain. So yes, compounding pharmacies can provide it to you and you offload the legal gray areas onto them. But just saying "they can't be patented" kind of hides most of the legal quandaries. From a practical perspective, many organizations and individuals do import these things without worrying about legal consequences, because enforcement is very low. But I wouldn't formally pretend the legal issues don't exist at all levels. https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/99625 https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/9962...
    - joedevon 3y ago
      I believe you. Look, I read a bunch of contradictory stuff on the internet about this and am close to a good number of people in healthcare who told me compound pharmacies are legit and that there's a lot of FUD on the internet. But I'm not pretending to be an expert in law or medicine. People need to research this and do what they feel comfortable with. That said, I'd personally prefer if the prices came down, the supply remained highly available and it was covered by insurance and the companies like Novo who spent money to create these solutions got paid for it. It's a miracle and they deserve what money they make off it.

tgmatt 3y ago

This perfectly encapsulates my experience. I'm hesitant to ask for this medication because of side effects and because it's got a 2 year limit in my country, so I don't want to go through it all then have to stop and ultimately put it all back on. Shit sucks, bro.

joedevon 3y ago
Do some research into compound pharmacies as a worst picture backup. I know several people on them successfully. Peptides can't be patented. Semaglutide is a peptide. They are patenting the delivery mechanism AFAICT. As to sides, ramp up slowly. Maybe you won't have any. Also, there are new drugs coming that are even better. I'm sure the shortages and whatnot will be sorted out. The solution is out there. They can't stop this train.
- reaperman 3y ago
  > Peptides can't be patented. This is...mostly wrong. Like both normal wrong, and "x-y problem" wrong. There is definitely some truth in there, but the full explanation would require an actual lawyer, because there's a LOT of layers of complication. Just so people don't have to simply take my word against yours, here's Jacob Sherkow, JD, a professor of law and medicine at the Illinois College of Medicine on the topic: > semaglutide that's "made, used, sold, offered to be sold, or imported into the United States is possibly an act of infringement, if Novo were to sue them" But this isn't just about patents -- that's the "x-y problem" that I was talking about. It may not be legal to import active ingredients of FDA-approved drugs. Most peptides (AOC-9604, BPC-157, Ibutamoren, Ipamorelin, etc) are "legal" because they're not considered drugs. Once they're FDA approved, they become not legal to import/re-sell unless you're a compounding pharmacy. It wouldn't generally be legal to import fexofenadine (OTC allergy medication), for example, even though it's not a controlled substance. Because importing non-FDA drugs is generally not legal unless you're a licensed part of the medical supply chain. So yes, compounding pharmacies can provide it to you and you offload the legal gray areas onto them. But just saying "they can't be patented" kind of hides most of the legal quandaries. From a practical perspective, many organizations and individuals do import these things without worrying about legal consequences, because enforcement is very low. But I wouldn't formally pretend the legal issues don't exist at all levels. https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/99625 https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/9962...
  - joedevon 3y ago
    I believe you. Look, I read a bunch of contradictory stuff on the internet about this and am close to a good number of people in healthcare who told me compound pharmacies are legit and that there's a lot of FUD on the internet. But I'm not pretending to be an expert in law or medicine. People need to research this and do what they feel comfortable with. That said, I'd personally prefer if the prices came down, the supply remained highly available and it was covered by insurance and the companies like Novo who spent money to create these solutions got paid for it. It's a miracle and they deserve what money they make off it.