6 ms·

With the advent of Ozympic, it would be cool if at some point being slim became so commonplace and boring that we flipped back to being attracted to fat people

With the advent of Ozympic, it would be cool if at some point being slim became so commonplace and boring that we flipped back to being attracted to fat people like the middle ages.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
A town full of people with stinky burps
AtlasBarfed 2y ago
Nah, it will either lead to: - more trendiness of muscles/fitness - plastic surgery (like the russian/housewives-of inflated lips) People are lazy, I get it, but ozempic should provide the enabler for big people to get fit: it gets rid of a whole lot of fat that increases stresses on their joints. So you lose weight with ozempic, and then you could ... ideally ... start a good fitness program. But we all know it will be used just for the pill popping convenience.
- yoyohello13 2y ago
  Yes, Ozempic removes the fat (and obesity related health problems) but doesn't remove the need for exercise. Exercise has a whole host of positive effects beyond weight management. I believe Ozempic will probably lead to a lot of thin, but sarcopenic people.
  - danielvaughn 2y ago
    It also doesn't remove the need for a healthy diet. For a bit, I had a personal trainer. He would always tell me stories about guys he trained that were super fit and seemed like they were in great health, but they ate like shit and ended up having heart attacks and all that in their 40's anyways.
    - malfist 2y ago
      Ozempic makes it so much easier to have a healthy diet too. I've been taking it for ~5 months now, losing a steady ~0.75lb/wk which is a perfectly health rate to lose at. Greasy, fatty, hyper processed foods are a quick trip to nausea-ville for me. The thought of a meatlovers pizza physically turns my stomach now. I am irrationally happy when my partner wants to go out to eat and we go somewhere that has grilled salmon on a salad. I'm not being driven by all the little fats and salts and cheeses they add to food to make it more additive, I can freely choose, and enjoy, healthier less processed options. It's also crazy the portion sizes. Like I'm losing just under a pound a week, that should mean I have roughly a 400 calorie a day deficit (roughly 1.5 klondke bars). I routinely eat half of what's served in restaurants, or a third, and still have a minuscule deficit. Portion sizes in the US are just too damn big, and everyone expects them. My partner has found it harder to eat large meals since I'm not eating large meals and he's lost weight too. It's been fantastic for both of us.
  - the_real_cher 2y ago
    Simply not being fat has a whole lot of health benefits...sarcopenic or not its a step in the right direction
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  > But we all know it will be used just for the pill popping convenience. Hell yeah sounds good to me.
- proteal 2y ago
  Most of weight loss actually happens in the kitchen, not the gym. A candy bar is roughly equivalent to a 20 minute run, in terms of Calories. Weight loss drugs surpress appetite urges. Even if you got super fit on the drug, without long term habit changes, most people are likely to put back on the weight quickly. Somewhat counter intuitively, fat people tend to have strong muscles to move all their mass around. My understanding with these drugs is that they artificially inhibit cravings, reducing the urge to eat, thus effectively stimulating weight loss. As soon as the drug stops being administered, the cravings return (and thus the weight) regardless of how fit you are. Just as an anecdote, I used to not understand how people got so fat. Just eat less lol? I’ve been a little light for my size pretty much my whole life, so I didn’t quite understand. In fact, if it were up to me I probably wouldn’t eat at all. So the concept of being overweight was foreign to me and I assumed that fat people must be lazy/weak/whatever. As I got older and a little more in tune with my body, I noticed what sugar cravings are really like. And my god, when that part of the brain complains, it gets front and center stage. I specifically remember trying hard to resist reaching for a soda for like an hour. I conceded and drank one. I couldn’t focus otherwise. Then I realized that there are people (typically easily spotted) that live every day of their life like this. And I get that the brain is hardwired for gluttony- I will literally never eat enough food in my life- so it’s a rather natural thing to want Calories. I’m lucky that I’ve got a passable relationship with food. I feel for those who struggle with it. I’m also glad that there is a stop-gap in drugs like ozempic that help effectively curtail eating, today. I’m also hopeful that the drugs of tomorrow will be even safer and more effective than we have now and that the systemic sources of obesity in society erode away. I think the future is only getting brighter (and lighter) for the millions struggling with their weight.
  - orwin 2y ago
    As an ex-obese, you partly understand the issue. It's true that craving are omnipresent (still are for me, and I'm at 25 BMI now, used to be 34). The main issue is hunger and physical pain caused by hunger though. It's an hormonal imbalance, I 'fixed' it by fasting (you need access, time and money to do that in a controlled way, but you can also wing it. Careful, the second day is extremely painful). If you can fix it with medication and without torturing yourself (which the fast felt like), more power to everyone. [edit] also you have a pretty empathic way of thinking.
- spacemadness 2y ago
  I highly doubt your thesis. People losing weight with no effort is not going to enable them to put in effort to actually get fit. Especially later in life for folks that have spent most of their adult years not moving a lot. Coupled with that is the potential muscle loss from losing weight this way; trying to regain that lost muscle could be discouraging at first, especially without the right diet.
  - AtlasBarfed 2y ago
    My "theory" is about the evolution standards of beauty, not what people will actually do when they get thin. Getting fit is a big psychological and lifestyle barrier, I agree. But, not having an excess 50-200 lbs sure helps if someone does try to start.
- consteval 2y ago
  > People are lazy, I get it No I don't think you do. We are dealing with a global crisis of obesity. We have a disease more prolific than ever before. There is something about the human brain that is wrong or imcompatible with the modern surplus of food. Something about our reward centers doesn't work. Not with modern society. Addiction of this scale cannot be solved with individual actions. "Just stop" doesn't save an alcoholic, nor does it save a smoker. Fundamentally we need to rewrite how we view obesity. We need solutions. Not more of this "try harder" fluff. Because it just doesn't work. If what you're saying is true, we wouldn't be in this mess. Obesity is more complex than we give it credit. It goes back to the food industry, health industry, advertisement. We can't just ignore everything and continue our "do nothing" approach. This is not a discipline problem, this is a human problem. The solution MUST then target humans, not their actions. If that's a drug, for now, that's fine.
  - AtlasBarfed 2y ago
    Except there are classes of people (often athletes or former athletes) that are spectacularly good at using exercise/staying fit. And there are examples like Iceland (this is secondhand from when Iceland made the World Cup, I don't have stats) where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. Exercise has a 1 month hump. You need to stick to it for 1 month before it sticks and your body's endorphin rush + increased pain tolerance overcomes the initial discomfort/shock of exercise. One month is obviously a long way. It does seem insurmountable to some degree based on decades of slow descent to the obesity valley that is America, but there are counterexamples in the world. But we also have never had a government that REALLY embraced comprehensive fitness and health policies over a generational timespan, despite ample evidence it would improve productivity, reduce health care costs, increase mental health, improve quality of life, increase intelligence, improve cooperation / social interaction / culture, and probably increase fecundity and turn around the demographic declines of advanced first world economies. That means extensive changes to schooling, heavily incentivizing the reconfiguration of urban centers for more human power transport, lots of facilities, probably a sea change of health care policy. There are huge and powerful lobbies that would probably kill those initiatives, from big corn syrup, big tobacco, big media, AMA, etc.
Eumenes 2y ago
"Fat" back then was roughly a BMI of 23-27. Average American BMI is around 30 today.
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  That's because there was no processed food and high fructose corn syrup back then so 27 is probably the max BMI they can reach. Nowadays the sky's the limit for how beautiful one can be.
EPWN3D 2y ago
That won't happen because it never happened in the first place. The people of the middle ages were like us -- they broadly liked slender people, women with perky breasts, and men with broad shoulders. This should not be surprising. Attraction is pretty hard-wired into humans by evolution, and for most of our existence, food has been scarce. There is absolutely no reason why a time of more plentiful food due to agriculture (relative to most of human history) would have resulted in changing the body types we generally prefer. To say nothing of evolution's timescales, which are measured in tens of thousands of generations for significant changes like that. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8044k7/is_it_true_that_the_beauty_ideal_in_medieval/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8044k7/is_it...
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  Gotta love using reddit as a source. Redditors unite!
  - EPWN3D 2y ago
    The post has a ton of links, and r/askhistorians is one of the most heavily vetted and moderated subreddits in existence. I'm sorry it's not what you wanted to hear, but no, fat people were not attractive in the middle ages because of food scarcity. Because there was no food scarcity. Relative to human history at the time, there was an abundance of food.

With the advent of Ozympic, it would be cool if at some point being slim became so commonplace and boring that we flipped back to being attracted to fat people like the middle ages.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago

A town full of people with stinky burps

AtlasBarfed 2y ago

Nah, it will either lead to: - more trendiness of muscles/fitness - plastic surgery (like the russian/housewives-of inflated lips) People are lazy, I get it, but ozempic should provide the enabler for big people to get fit: it gets rid of a whole lot of fat that increases stresses on their joints. So you lose weight with ozempic, and then you could ... ideally ... start a good fitness program. But we all know it will be used just for the pill popping convenience.

yoyohello13 2y ago
Yes, Ozempic removes the fat (and obesity related health problems) but doesn't remove the need for exercise. Exercise has a whole host of positive effects beyond weight management. I believe Ozempic will probably lead to a lot of thin, but sarcopenic people.
- danielvaughn 2y ago
  It also doesn't remove the need for a healthy diet. For a bit, I had a personal trainer. He would always tell me stories about guys he trained that were super fit and seemed like they were in great health, but they ate like shit and ended up having heart attacks and all that in their 40's anyways.
  - malfist 2y ago
    Ozempic makes it so much easier to have a healthy diet too. I've been taking it for ~5 months now, losing a steady ~0.75lb/wk which is a perfectly health rate to lose at. Greasy, fatty, hyper processed foods are a quick trip to nausea-ville for me. The thought of a meatlovers pizza physically turns my stomach now. I am irrationally happy when my partner wants to go out to eat and we go somewhere that has grilled salmon on a salad. I'm not being driven by all the little fats and salts and cheeses they add to food to make it more additive, I can freely choose, and enjoy, healthier less processed options. It's also crazy the portion sizes. Like I'm losing just under a pound a week, that should mean I have roughly a 400 calorie a day deficit (roughly 1.5 klondke bars). I routinely eat half of what's served in restaurants, or a third, and still have a minuscule deficit. Portion sizes in the US are just too damn big, and everyone expects them. My partner has found it harder to eat large meals since I'm not eating large meals and he's lost weight too. It's been fantastic for both of us.
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  Simply not being fat has a whole lot of health benefits...sarcopenic or not its a step in the right direction
the_real_cher 2y ago
> But we all know it will be used just for the pill popping convenience. Hell yeah sounds good to me.
proteal 2y ago
Most of weight loss actually happens in the kitchen, not the gym. A candy bar is roughly equivalent to a 20 minute run, in terms of Calories. Weight loss drugs surpress appetite urges. Even if you got super fit on the drug, without long term habit changes, most people are likely to put back on the weight quickly. Somewhat counter intuitively, fat people tend to have strong muscles to move all their mass around. My understanding with these drugs is that they artificially inhibit cravings, reducing the urge to eat, thus effectively stimulating weight loss. As soon as the drug stops being administered, the cravings return (and thus the weight) regardless of how fit you are. Just as an anecdote, I used to not understand how people got so fat. Just eat less lol? I’ve been a little light for my size pretty much my whole life, so I didn’t quite understand. In fact, if it were up to me I probably wouldn’t eat at all. So the concept of being overweight was foreign to me and I assumed that fat people must be lazy/weak/whatever. As I got older and a little more in tune with my body, I noticed what sugar cravings are really like. And my god, when that part of the brain complains, it gets front and center stage. I specifically remember trying hard to resist reaching for a soda for like an hour. I conceded and drank one. I couldn’t focus otherwise. Then I realized that there are people (typically easily spotted) that live every day of their life like this. And I get that the brain is hardwired for gluttony- I will literally never eat enough food in my life- so it’s a rather natural thing to want Calories. I’m lucky that I’ve got a passable relationship with food. I feel for those who struggle with it. I’m also glad that there is a stop-gap in drugs like ozempic that help effectively curtail eating, today. I’m also hopeful that the drugs of tomorrow will be even safer and more effective than we have now and that the systemic sources of obesity in society erode away. I think the future is only getting brighter (and lighter) for the millions struggling with their weight.
- orwin 2y ago
  As an ex-obese, you partly understand the issue. It's true that craving are omnipresent (still are for me, and I'm at 25 BMI now, used to be 34). The main issue is hunger and physical pain caused by hunger though. It's an hormonal imbalance, I 'fixed' it by fasting (you need access, time and money to do that in a controlled way, but you can also wing it. Careful, the second day is extremely painful). If you can fix it with medication and without torturing yourself (which the fast felt like), more power to everyone. [edit] also you have a pretty empathic way of thinking.
spacemadness 2y ago
I highly doubt your thesis. People losing weight with no effort is not going to enable them to put in effort to actually get fit. Especially later in life for folks that have spent most of their adult years not moving a lot. Coupled with that is the potential muscle loss from losing weight this way; trying to regain that lost muscle could be discouraging at first, especially without the right diet.
- AtlasBarfed 2y ago
  My "theory" is about the evolution standards of beauty, not what people will actually do when they get thin. Getting fit is a big psychological and lifestyle barrier, I agree. But, not having an excess 50-200 lbs sure helps if someone does try to start.
consteval 2y ago
> People are lazy, I get it No I don't think you do. We are dealing with a global crisis of obesity. We have a disease more prolific than ever before. There is something about the human brain that is wrong or imcompatible with the modern surplus of food. Something about our reward centers doesn't work. Not with modern society. Addiction of this scale cannot be solved with individual actions. "Just stop" doesn't save an alcoholic, nor does it save a smoker. Fundamentally we need to rewrite how we view obesity. We need solutions. Not more of this "try harder" fluff. Because it just doesn't work. If what you're saying is true, we wouldn't be in this mess. Obesity is more complex than we give it credit. It goes back to the food industry, health industry, advertisement. We can't just ignore everything and continue our "do nothing" approach. This is not a discipline problem, this is a human problem. The solution MUST then target humans, not their actions. If that's a drug, for now, that's fine.
- AtlasBarfed 2y ago
  Except there are classes of people (often athletes or former athletes) that are spectacularly good at using exercise/staying fit. And there are examples like Iceland (this is secondhand from when Iceland made the World Cup, I don't have stats) where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. Exercise has a 1 month hump. You need to stick to it for 1 month before it sticks and your body's endorphin rush + increased pain tolerance overcomes the initial discomfort/shock of exercise. One month is obviously a long way. It does seem insurmountable to some degree based on decades of slow descent to the obesity valley that is America, but there are counterexamples in the world. But we also have never had a government that REALLY embraced comprehensive fitness and health policies over a generational timespan, despite ample evidence it would improve productivity, reduce health care costs, increase mental health, improve quality of life, increase intelligence, improve cooperation / social interaction / culture, and probably increase fecundity and turn around the demographic declines of advanced first world economies. That means extensive changes to schooling, heavily incentivizing the reconfiguration of urban centers for more human power transport, lots of facilities, probably a sea change of health care policy. There are huge and powerful lobbies that would probably kill those initiatives, from big corn syrup, big tobacco, big media, AMA, etc.

Eumenes 2y ago

"Fat" back then was roughly a BMI of 23-27. Average American BMI is around 30 today.

the_real_cher 2y ago
That's because there was no processed food and high fructose corn syrup back then so 27 is probably the max BMI they can reach. Nowadays the sky's the limit for how beautiful one can be.

EPWN3D 2y ago

That won't happen because it never happened in the first place. The people of the middle ages were like us -- they broadly liked slender people, women with perky breasts, and men with broad shoulders. This should not be surprising. Attraction is pretty hard-wired into humans by evolution, and for most of our existence, food has been scarce. There is absolutely no reason why a time of more plentiful food due to agriculture (relative to most of human history) would have resulted in changing the body types we generally prefer. To say nothing of evolution's timescales, which are measured in tens of thousands of generations for significant changes like that. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8044k7/is_it_true_that_the_beauty_ideal_in_medieval/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8044k7/is_it...

the_real_cher 2y ago
Gotta love using reddit as a source. Redditors unite!
- EPWN3D 2y ago
  The post has a ton of links, and r/askhistorians is one of the most heavily vetted and moderated subreddits in existence. I'm sorry it's not what you wanted to hear, but no, fat people were not attractive in the middle ages because of food scarcity. Because there was no food scarcity. Relative to human history at the time, there was an abundance of food.