5 ms·

This is a good example of why the focus on developing magic pills that aim to curb obesity is so silly[1]. Body composition and strength are just as important,

This is a good example of why the focus on developing magic pills that aim to curb obesity is so silly[1]. Body composition and strength are just as important, if not more important, than weight, especially as one ages. The reason this is ignored is that there's only so much you can do to significantly improve your body composition and strength without exercise and healthy eating. > Nonetheless, the maintenance of adequate muscle mass, strength, and metabolic function has rarely, if ever, been targeted as a relevant endpoint of recommendations for dietary intake. It's kind of sad that the "official" recommendations basically ignore what even the most inexperienced personal trainer could tell you. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8736567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8736567

jessriedel 12y ago
A magic pill that could curb obesity would deliver hundreds of billions of dollars worth of improved health outcomes in the US, regardless of whether getting everyone to put on more muscle would be preferable. (And that's not even accounting for the fact that people who hate exercise lose utility even if you can convince them to do it.)
- 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
  You seem to be assuming that the health conditions and costs commonly associated with obesity are all primarily caused by obesity. I'd suggest you consider the possibility that obesity is just as likely to be a symptom of poor health as it is to be the cause of it. On this point, there are plenty of people who aren't obese who have cardiovascular disease, diabetes, etc. There's a lot we don't know about the human body, but based on what we do know, it's asinine to believe that folks can eat horribly and live sedentary lifestyles without serious consequence. That, however, is what magic pill research effectively promises.
  - jessriedel 12y ago
    > I'd suggest you consider the possibility that obesity is just as likely to be a symptom of poor health as it is to be the cause of it. I gladly acknowledge that possibility, but you should acknowledge the likelihood that the medical community is roughly correct in its belief that obesity does in fact cause a huge number of health related problems regardless of whether this is "primary". My claim above does not rest on obesity being the dominant factor. > it's asinine to believe that folks can eat horribly and live sedentary lifestyles without serious consequence. Misunderstanding someone's claim and then suggesting that their beliefs are asinine is not a good way to get people to engage productively with you.
    - rational-future 12y ago
      Haha, 7Figures2Commas got pwned.
    - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
      First, please don't pretend that the "medical community" is a homogenous body that produces broad consensus on complex matters. There is and always has been a significant amount of debate amongst medical professionals on a variety of topics. The topic of cholesterol provides many examples of this. For years, it was widely believed that raising the levels of HDL cholesterol would reduce the risk of heart disease. On that belief alone, many doctors regularly prescribed niacin to patients. Yet a few years ago, a study basically revealed that while niacin did raise HDL levels, it didn't reduce heart disease risk[1]. What's worse, more recent studies have revealed that niacin may have exposed patients to unacceptable risk[2]. To be clear: if you were ever diagnosed as having low HDL cholesterol, there's a good chance that your doctor would have recommended that you consider a treatment that not only would have been ineffective but exposed you to risk. All based on a widely-promoted hypothesis we now have ample evidence is flawed. On the topic of obesity, there is growing evidence that obesity is not the cause of a significant number of the most expensive health problems thought of as being caused by or strongly associated with obesity. Take Type 2 diabetes. Recent studies[3] show that it's a very complex condition, and genetics likely plays a more significant role than thought. Somewhat disturbingly, a longitudinal study published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine found that "An intensive lifestyle intervention focusing on weight loss did not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes." That calls into question the notion that even weight loss is a panacea for Type 2 diabetes. You may not like my use of the word asinine, but if you're going to suggest that a magic pill for obesity "would deliver hundreds of billions of dollars worth of improved health outcomes in the US," you should at least have some evidence to back it up. To do that, however, you have the very high barrier of establishing that a) obesity in meaningful part causes the costly conditions promoted as being obesity-related and b) reduction of obesity would provide a significant enough benefit to eliminate a meaningful portion of the costs associated with these conditions. More and more research shows this is not the case. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/health/policy/27heart.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/health/policy/27heart.html [2] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/taking-niacin-for-the-heart-may-pose-serious-health-risks/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/taking-niacin-for-the-heart-may-... [3] http://consumer.healthday.com/diabetes-information-10/misc-diabetes-news-181/obesity-isn-t-sole-cause-of-type-2-diabetes-691898.html http://consumer.healthday.com/diabetes-information-10/misc-d... [4] http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1212914 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1212914
fasteo 12y ago
I wouldn´t say that it is silly. Rather, it is just pragmatic. Obesity costs billions of dollars per year and, sadly, only a pill can stop this.
- toolz 12y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but a pill is nowhere near as effective at causing weight loss as changing your diet can be.
  - taeric 12y ago
    It doesn't have to be "better than diet," per se. Though, I do note that diet has done a lousy job of helping most of the population. And the response that people aren't following the correct diet is missing the point. As that is the point. That is to say, which do you think you'd have better luck with, convincing a segment of the population to take a pill once a day, or to adopt a diet that will have advantageous results? Edit: And this ignores that you could go with both, of course.
  - fasteo 12y ago
    Couldn´t agree more, but how do you convince millions of people to change their diet with the promise that it will reduce their health problems in 20-30 years, saving their country billions of dollar a year in health care costs ?
    - sgt101 12y ago
      Tax unhealthy foods. In particular processed foods. So zero rate fresh vegetables and fruit, and fresh meat if you can manage that with the legal system (because it is processed). Then whack 25% on everything else. Now.. I shall make the comment to bring the downvotes! But I am tough so I shall do it. Bacon should be in the 25% tax bracket. -karma here I come...
      - fasteo 12y ago
        upvote for the bacon. I am afraid that taxes would be a boomerang is this case. The industry will just lower production costs to offset the taxes. Lowering the costs meaning that crap food will be crapier and here we go again...
fasteo 12y ago
The pill[1] [1]https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2014/12/and-if-the-research-community-does-in-fact-find-a-viable-treatment-for-obesity.php https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2014/12/and-if-the-resea...

jessriedel 12y ago

A magic pill that could curb obesity would deliver hundreds of billions of dollars worth of improved health outcomes in the US, regardless of whether getting everyone to put on more muscle would be preferable. (And that's not even accounting for the fact that people who hate exercise lose utility even if you can convince them to do it.)

7Figures2Commas 12y ago
You seem to be assuming that the health conditions and costs commonly associated with obesity are all primarily caused by obesity. I'd suggest you consider the possibility that obesity is just as likely to be a symptom of poor health as it is to be the cause of it. On this point, there are plenty of people who aren't obese who have cardiovascular disease, diabetes, etc. There's a lot we don't know about the human body, but based on what we do know, it's asinine to believe that folks can eat horribly and live sedentary lifestyles without serious consequence. That, however, is what magic pill research effectively promises.
- jessriedel 12y ago
  > I'd suggest you consider the possibility that obesity is just as likely to be a symptom of poor health as it is to be the cause of it. I gladly acknowledge that possibility, but you should acknowledge the likelihood that the medical community is roughly correct in its belief that obesity does in fact cause a huge number of health related problems regardless of whether this is "primary". My claim above does not rest on obesity being the dominant factor. > it's asinine to believe that folks can eat horribly and live sedentary lifestyles without serious consequence. Misunderstanding someone's claim and then suggesting that their beliefs are asinine is not a good way to get people to engage productively with you.
  - rational-future 12y ago
    Haha, 7Figures2Commas got pwned.
  - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
    First, please don't pretend that the "medical community" is a homogenous body that produces broad consensus on complex matters. There is and always has been a significant amount of debate amongst medical professionals on a variety of topics. The topic of cholesterol provides many examples of this. For years, it was widely believed that raising the levels of HDL cholesterol would reduce the risk of heart disease. On that belief alone, many doctors regularly prescribed niacin to patients. Yet a few years ago, a study basically revealed that while niacin did raise HDL levels, it didn't reduce heart disease risk[1]. What's worse, more recent studies have revealed that niacin may have exposed patients to unacceptable risk[2]. To be clear: if you were ever diagnosed as having low HDL cholesterol, there's a good chance that your doctor would have recommended that you consider a treatment that not only would have been ineffective but exposed you to risk. All based on a widely-promoted hypothesis we now have ample evidence is flawed. On the topic of obesity, there is growing evidence that obesity is not the cause of a significant number of the most expensive health problems thought of as being caused by or strongly associated with obesity. Take Type 2 diabetes. Recent studies[3] show that it's a very complex condition, and genetics likely plays a more significant role than thought. Somewhat disturbingly, a longitudinal study published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine found that "An intensive lifestyle intervention focusing on weight loss did not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes." That calls into question the notion that even weight loss is a panacea for Type 2 diabetes. You may not like my use of the word asinine, but if you're going to suggest that a magic pill for obesity "would deliver hundreds of billions of dollars worth of improved health outcomes in the US," you should at least have some evidence to back it up. To do that, however, you have the very high barrier of establishing that a) obesity in meaningful part causes the costly conditions promoted as being obesity-related and b) reduction of obesity would provide a significant enough benefit to eliminate a meaningful portion of the costs associated with these conditions. More and more research shows this is not the case. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/health/policy/27heart.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/health/policy/27heart.html [2] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/taking-niacin-for-the-heart-may-pose-serious-health-risks/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/taking-niacin-for-the-heart-may-... [3] http://consumer.healthday.com/diabetes-information-10/misc-diabetes-news-181/obesity-isn-t-sole-cause-of-type-2-diabetes-691898.html http://consumer.healthday.com/diabetes-information-10/misc-d... [4] http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1212914 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1212914

fasteo 12y ago

I wouldn´t say that it is silly. Rather, it is just pragmatic. Obesity costs billions of dollars per year and, sadly, only a pill can stop this.

toolz 12y ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but a pill is nowhere near as effective at causing weight loss as changing your diet can be.
- taeric 12y ago
  It doesn't have to be "better than diet," per se. Though, I do note that diet has done a lousy job of helping most of the population. And the response that people aren't following the correct diet is missing the point. As that is the point. That is to say, which do you think you'd have better luck with, convincing a segment of the population to take a pill once a day, or to adopt a diet that will have advantageous results? Edit: And this ignores that you could go with both, of course.
- fasteo 12y ago
  Couldn´t agree more, but how do you convince millions of people to change their diet with the promise that it will reduce their health problems in 20-30 years, saving their country billions of dollar a year in health care costs ?
  - sgt101 12y ago
    Tax unhealthy foods. In particular processed foods. So zero rate fresh vegetables and fruit, and fresh meat if you can manage that with the legal system (because it is processed). Then whack 25% on everything else. Now.. I shall make the comment to bring the downvotes! But I am tough so I shall do it. Bacon should be in the 25% tax bracket. -karma here I come...
    - fasteo 12y ago
      upvote for the bacon. I am afraid that taxes would be a boomerang is this case. The industry will just lower production costs to offset the taxes. Lowering the costs meaning that crap food will be crapier and here we go again...

fasteo 12y ago

The pill[1] [1]https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2014/12/and-if-the-research-community-does-in-fact-find-a-viable-treatment-for-obesity.php https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2014/12/and-if-the-resea...