"I No Longer Think GLP-1s Are the Answer — The drugs "work" but may be working against us long-term"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many drugs I plan to use for life. I’ll never get off Zyrtec. I don’t expect Advil taken for today’s headache to work on one next week. I’ll be on birth control until I’m on hormone replacement. I don’t see myself ever stopping using Tretinoin. Both my parents will be on cholesterol drugs for life, so I expect at some point I will be too.

Why is it that when it comes to weight loss medications people are clutching their pearls at the idea that people won’t eventually stop?

Because they want people to stop. And then gain the wait back. Because they hate fat people, because they need someone to feel superior to. This "People will gain it back if they stop!!" stuff is all about driving the narrative that it is somehow "cheating" to use medical intervention for obesity. It's similar to people a generation ago clutching their pearls at the idea that certain folks were "acting uppity."

Consider that we want a healthy society where this type of behavior is not normalized. I want my kids to grow up surrounded by healthy diets and exercise - not people who can’t control themselves and try to take a short cut. There was zero obesity at the turn of the century. There’s no good reason for it now other than people cannot control themselves around junk food that is push through ever media possible - weak minds, weak impulse control, equates to weak society. I don’t want that for my kids to live in. I’m sure you blame your obesity on hormones or something out of your control, but it’s not that or we would see fat mammals in the wild and people would have been obese throughout history.

DP: Only the weak minded would conclude that the current obesity crisis is all about "weak minds." More and more research is learning that the brain is actually controlled by the stomach, not the other way around. The content of the gut controls it all. If your gut does not have the right enzymes or does not produce the correct hormones, and thousands of other chemical processes needed, it changes everything, inlcuding the brain. You may think it is impossible to eat clean and exercise daily and still gain weight or store fat, but research is proving this to be untrue. If the gut can't do what it is supposed to do, your body may never get the signal that it is sated, your brain signals my be switched on and off according to what your gut is and is not able to process, your body may not convert food to energy, your body may default to fat storage in error.

What you believe about food and exercise may work for your genetics and for people whose bodies do not have any genetic or physical alterations caused by the environment or a childhood/lifetine of poor nutrition intake. But in the long and complex process of human energy consumption and utilization (the brain being a benefactor of this, not the driver of it), many things can go wrong and those things can impact literally every part of the human body and brain.

As to animals, you know we can reproduce these problems in lab animals. In the wild, they'd die, so no, you wouldn't see them if these particular changes occurred in the animal population. And if you don't think evironmental polution and decreased food quality are contributing to the decline in health and overall survival of animal populations, you aren't paying attention.

As to human history, obviously no, it has not been static in terms of disease, food availablity, food quality, environmental stimuli, gene pool, pollution, labor and general activitiy of populations, etc, etc. All of this impacts health and even literally changes the human body.

Also, science continues to evolve and challenge things human once tied to moral inferiority and weakness: leprosy is not a curse on sinners; people who don't drink alcohol CAN get liver disease especially from hemochomatosis, so no doc, they weren't lying about alcohol consumption; we now know the kid who can't read wasn't "stupid" he was a smart kid who had dyslexia and wasnt' taught correctly; the other kid wasn't lazy, he had ADD and wasn't taught how to manage it; the kid with the temper wasn't "born bad", he needed medication to correct an easily identified hormonal imbalance; red hair wasn't witchery, it was complex genetics; families weren't "cursed" by the moral failing of an ancestor, they were passing on fatal genetic anomalies; whole communities of children were not genetically unintelligent, they were victims of lead poisoning from chipping paint in their community; and so on. You are linking obesity to a moral failing, when hisotry should have taught you to look to science.

Yes, obesity is on the rise rise. Researchers are trying to learn why. The answer is highly unlikley to lie simply in moral failing and metal weakness. The answers will be far more varied and complex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many drugs I plan to use for life. I’ll never get off Zyrtec. I don’t expect Advil taken for today’s headache to work on one next week. I’ll be on birth control until I’m on hormone replacement. I don’t see myself ever stopping using Tretinoin. Both my parents will be on cholesterol drugs for life, so I expect at some point I will be too.

Why is it that when it comes to weight loss medications people are clutching their pearls at the idea that people won’t eventually stop?

Because they want people to stop. And then gain the wait back. Because they hate fat people, because they need someone to feel superior to. This "People will gain it back if they stop!!" stuff is all about driving the narrative that it is somehow "cheating" to use medical intervention for obesity. It's similar to people a generation ago clutching their pearls at the idea that certain folks were "acting uppity."

Consider that we want a healthy society where this type of behavior is not normalized. I want my kids to grow up surrounded by healthy diets and exercise - not people who can’t control themselves and try to take a short cut. There was zero obesity at the turn of the century. There’s no good reason for it now other than people cannot control themselves around junk food that is push through ever media possible - weak minds, weak impulse control, equates to weak society. I don’t want that for my kids to live in. I’m sure you blame your obesity on hormones or something out of your control, but it’s not that or we would see fat mammals in the wild and people would have been obese throughout history.

What do you think people on Ozempic eat?

Before ozempic forced them to a diet rich in nutrients and protein, they ate lots of junk. That’s how they got there! So if they went on the diet without th drug they’d have the same results.

Your ignorance is stunning. There are many people who become overweight without eating a lot of "junk". Having an illness or injury or being on a medication that causes weight gain is very common. Yes, some people get fat from eating a lot of junk, but not everyone. Also, some people do not have an income that allows them to avoid "junk" or live in food deserts that make it hard to eat healthy.

Also, the numerous studies on GLP medications show that the control groups on the same food or exercise regimes did not in fact lose weight to the same degree as the GLP groups - proving exactly contrary to your assertion that, "if they went on the diet without the drug, they'd have the same results." That is why these medications are considered so revolutionary. They accomplish something that cannot be accomplished by diet and exercise alone, especially when considered across a group. For example, maybe the mean weight loss in a control group was 5% bodyweight loss, but the GLP mean bodyweight loss was around 20%.

GLPs primarily work by suppressing appetite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many drugs I plan to use for life. I’ll never get off Zyrtec. I don’t expect Advil taken for today’s headache to work on one next week. I’ll be on birth control until I’m on hormone replacement. I don’t see myself ever stopping using Tretinoin. Both my parents will be on cholesterol drugs for life, so I expect at some point I will be too.

Why is it that when it comes to weight loss medications people are clutching their pearls at the idea that people won’t eventually stop?

Because they want people to stop. And then gain the wait back. Because they hate fat people, because they need someone to feel superior to. This "People will gain it back if they stop!!" stuff is all about driving the narrative that it is somehow "cheating" to use medical intervention for obesity. It's similar to people a generation ago clutching their pearls at the idea that certain folks were "acting uppity."

Consider that we want a healthy society where this type of behavior is not normalized. I want my kids to grow up surrounded by healthy diets and exercise - not people who can’t control themselves and try to take a short cut. There was zero obesity at the turn of the century. There’s no good reason for it now other than people cannot control themselves around junk food that is push through ever media possible - weak minds, weak impulse control, equates to weak society. I don’t want that for my kids to live in. I’m sure you blame your obesity on hormones or something out of your control, but it’s not that or we would see fat mammals in the wild and people would have been obese throughout history.

DP: Only the weak minded would conclude that the current obesity crisis is all about "weak minds." More and more research is learning that the brain is actually controlled by the stomach, not the other way around. The content of the gut controls it all. If your gut does not have the right enzymes or does not produce the correct hormones, and thousands of other chemical processes needed, it changes everything, inlcuding the brain. You may think it is impossible to eat clean and exercise daily and still gain weight or store fat, but research is proving this to be untrue. If the gut can't do what it is supposed to do, your body may never get the signal that it is sated, your brain signals my be switched on and off according to what your gut is and is not able to process, your body may not convert food to energy, your body may default to fat storage in error.

What you believe about food and exercise may work for your genetics and for people whose bodies do not have any genetic or physical alterations caused by the environment or a childhood/lifetine of poor nutrition intake. But in the long and complex process of human energy consumption and utilization (the brain being a benefactor of this, not the driver of it), many things can go wrong and those things can impact literally every part of the human body and brain.

As to animals, you know we can reproduce these problems in lab animals. In the wild, they'd die, so no, you wouldn't see them if these particular changes occurred in the animal population. And if you don't think evironmental polution and decreased food quality are contributing to the decline in health and overall survival of animal populations, you aren't paying attention.

As to human history, obviously no, it has not been static in terms of disease, food availablity, food quality, environmental stimuli, gene pool, pollution, labor and general activitiy of populations, etc, etc. All of this impacts health and even literally changes the human body.

Also, science continues to evolve and challenge things human once tied to moral inferiority and weakness: leprosy is not a curse on sinners; people who don't drink alcohol CAN get liver disease especially from hemochomatosis, so no doc, they weren't lying about alcohol consumption; we now know the kid who can't read wasn't "stupid" he was a smart kid who had dyslexia and wasnt' taught correctly; the other kid wasn't lazy, he had ADD and wasn't taught how to manage it; the kid with the temper wasn't "born bad", he needed medication to correct an easily identified hormonal imbalance; red hair wasn't witchery, it was complex genetics; families weren't "cursed" by the moral failing of an ancestor, they were passing on fatal genetic anomalies; whole communities of children were not genetically unintelligent, they were victims of lead poisoning from chipping paint in their community; and so on. You are linking obesity to a moral failing, when hisotry should have taught you to look to science.

Yes, obesity is on the rise rise. Researchers are trying to learn why. The answer is highly unlikley to lie simply in moral failing and metal weakness. The answers will be far more varied and complex.

The answer is in calorie dense foods that become widely available after WWII and the people that choose these over the natural healthy alternatives. So it’s not a moral failing so much as stupidity and laziness coupled with bad choices. It’s still cheaper to make bread at home and eat beans that had been soaked than from a can and forego the chips, soda, boxed cereal, etc. It’s cheaper and healthier - people just don’t make these choices; instead they make excuses.

[Anonymous]

As only one example, when my type I diabetic traveled to an African country that uses much, much less sugar because it's an expensive ingredient for them - daily needed maybe 1/4th of insulin for the same foods here. So, yeah, this is a food problem and not a people problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As only one example, when my type I diabetic traveled to an African country that uses much, much less sugar because it's an expensive ingredient for them - daily needed maybe 1/4th of insulin for the same foods here. So, yeah, this is a food problem and not a people problem.

All my in-laws from a 3rd world country have T2D. Not from sugar but because all meals are served on a bed of rice. Indigenous food doesn’t mean healthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As only one example, when my type I diabetic traveled to an African country that uses much, much less sugar because it's an expensive ingredient for them - daily needed maybe 1/4th of insulin for the same foods here. So, yeah, this is a food problem and not a people problem.

All my in-laws from a 3rd world country have T2D. Not from sugar but because all meals are served on a bed of rice. Indigenous food doesn’t mean healthy.

No one was suggesting indigenous food means healthy. People are suggesting healthy unprocessed food is healthy. A diet of starch or fat or whatever must be eaten in balance with all other food groups and all must be in moderation. Even water can kill you in large quantities (hyponatremia). The PPs we’re suggesting overly processed and sugary foods are not part of any healthy diet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
“Food noise” is a symptom of mental health problems. Maybe people should solve the root cause rather than bandage the symptoms?

Why are medical advancements not a great way to treat mental health problems? Are you against medication helping depression too?

[Anonymous]

I take metformin for diabetes, and will probably be on it for life.

I also have taken levothyroxine since I was 12. Now 49. I have always now I would be on it for life.

I’m not sure what more there is to say about it? I have chronic conditions, and need to be on ongoing treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His claim that people who use the drugs lose muscle and don’t gain it back when they stop the drug therapy is concerning.

Has only to do with the speed of weight loss, which can be managed with proper dosing and nutrient intake. The issue is not with the medication.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. I’ve never seen anyone not lose massive amounts of muscle. Sure, it’s possible but it’s just as hard as losing weight and building muscle in a lifelong way - so the old fashioned way is better/safer.

Everyone loses muscle when they lose weight. You can reduce muscle mass loss by lifting and losing at a 1-2 lb per week rate. Nothing to do with the GLP-1…

You are naive and will fight to the end. Continue on your path.

GLP has everything to do with rate, which is what causes the large muscle loss. Gradual lifestyle changes are far more sustainable and healthier on your body.

Sure come back and say they’re not. I really don’t care. Then again I don’t need GLPs. I’m an athlete with a long history of muscle building and lifestyle sustainability. So just like you think popping a pill is magic with no long term data - I think healthy diet and exercise is magic with long term data and sustainability.

And there it is. You're mad that other people who don't have your work ethic will now also be able to be thin. And it makes you angry. Sit with those feelings and try to figure out why you care if other people also now wear the same dress size as you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His claim that people who use the drugs lose muscle and don’t gain it back when they stop the drug therapy is concerning.

Has only to do with the speed of weight loss, which can be managed with proper dosing and nutrient intake. The issue is not with the medication.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. I’ve never seen anyone not lose massive amounts of muscle. Sure, it’s possible but it’s just as hard as losing weight and building muscle in a lifelong way - so the old fashioned way is better/safer.

Everyone loses muscle when they lose weight. You can reduce muscle mass loss by lifting and losing at a 1-2 lb per week rate. Nothing to do with the GLP-1…

You are naive and will fight to the end. Continue on your path.

GLP has everything to do with rate, which is what causes the large muscle loss. Gradual lifestyle changes are far more sustainable and healthier on your body.

Sure come back and say they’re not. I really don’t care. Then again I don’t need GLPs. I’m an athlete with a long history of muscle building and lifestyle sustainability. So just like you think popping a pill is magic with no long term data - I think healthy diet and exercise is magic with long term data and sustainability.

Do you have any citations? Because I do. There’s no evidence that muscle mass loss in GLP-1s is any worse than muscle mass loss from other means.

“There's concern in the general public about how weight loss drugs affect muscle mass, but the presenters emphasize that the data doesn't show GLP-1 analogs have a unique, high level of lean body mass loss compared to other weight loss paradigms.”

https://advances.massgeneral.org/endocrinology/article.aspx?id=1601

I trust Mass General a lot more than I trust an unsubstantiated, anonymous claim on the internet.

Seriously?! You want citations for something so well known it dates back 100s of years of conventional wisdom? You are one of those “dumb” people PP mentioned.

Citations won’t convince me. We haven’t had these drugs long enough to even have the data. Remember the miracle drug fen-phen - this is the same. It’s a miracle until it’s not and we see the long term damage. The FDA approved fen-phen and the hype was the same as it is now. Maybe you are too young to remember that.

I should mention I’m in my 50s so I’ve seen the hype before. I’m also knowingly very bias. I’m 5’3” and 130 lbs - although I wear a size 0-2 - so I’m solid muscle, like really solid.

We have a couple decades of data but you don’t want to believe it because it makes you mad.

Same with fen-phen. And as I said - I don’t care what you do to your individual body. You could take prescription Adderall or non prescription speed and get the same effect - I also don’t want those normalized in society, just as this drug shouldn’t be normalized. I also don’t believe in normalizing pot, lsd, oxy, coke, fentanyl - most of which were legal at some point in history - and there is a reason they are no longer legal.

Wait, they're not? I've taken oxycodone AND fentanyl within the past year, legally. I didn't realize I was breaking the law. Go figure!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many drugs I plan to use for life. I’ll never get off Zyrtec. I don’t expect Advil taken for today’s headache to work on one next week. I’ll be on birth control until I’m on hormone replacement. I don’t see myself ever stopping using Tretinoin. Both my parents will be on cholesterol drugs for life, so I expect at some point I will be too.

Why is it that when it comes to weight loss medications people are clutching their pearls at the idea that people won’t eventually stop?

Because they want people to stop. And then gain the wait back. Because they hate fat people, because they need someone to feel superior to. This "People will gain it back if they stop!!" stuff is all about driving the narrative that it is somehow "cheating" to use medical intervention for obesity. It's similar to people a generation ago clutching their pearls at the idea that certain folks were "acting uppity."

Consider that we want a healthy society where this type of behavior is not normalized. I want my kids to grow up surrounded by healthy diets and exercise - not people who can’t control themselves and try to take a short cut. There was zero obesity at the turn of the century. There’s no good reason for it now other than people cannot control themselves around junk food that is push through ever media possible - weak minds, weak impulse control, equates to weak society. I don’t want that for my kids to live in. I’m sure you blame your obesity on hormones or something out of your control, but it’s not that or we would see fat mammals in the wild and people would have been obese throughout history.

Are you kidding me? Are you truly this stupid? You think there was "zero obesity at the turn of the century"? And you are claiming people were not "obese throughout history"? What in the fresh hell level of ignorance is this??? It's actually funny enough that I should probably ignore this as not real/trolling.

But if it's not made up, know that you are also clearly a horrible person. You don't want your kids around "weak minds"? Well, you'd better move out of the house and away from them and never see them again.

Sure it existed, but not at 40% of the population. Most people were turned away from military service, even during WWII for being too slim. It’s an inconvenient truth for you.

And you don’t need to be so triggered googlable facts - it doesn’t help your case.

That's because people had suffered through the great depression at that time (1940). They were malnourished. People had scurvy, people had babies who weren't growing. You think that was an example of excellent physical health? Lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As only one example, when my type I diabetic traveled to an African country that uses much, much less sugar because it's an expensive ingredient for them - daily needed maybe 1/4th of insulin for the same foods here. So, yeah, this is a food problem and not a people problem.

All my in-laws from a 3rd world country have T2D. Not from sugar but because all meals are served on a bed of rice. Indigenous food doesn’t mean healthy.

No one was suggesting indigenous food means healthy. People are suggesting healthy unprocessed food is healthy. A diet of starch or fat or whatever must be eaten in balance with all other food groups and all must be in moderation. Even water can kill you in large quantities (hyponatremia). The PPs we’re suggesting overly processed and sugary foods are not part of any healthy diet.

You can still EASILY get T2D on an unprocessed diet. That’s the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His claim that people who use the drugs lose muscle and don’t gain it back when they stop the drug therapy is concerning.

Has only to do with the speed of weight loss, which can be managed with proper dosing and nutrient intake. The issue is not with the medication.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. I’ve never seen anyone not lose massive amounts of muscle. Sure, it’s possible but it’s just as hard as losing weight and building muscle in a lifelong way - so the old fashioned way is better/safer.

Everyone loses muscle when they lose weight. You can reduce muscle mass loss by lifting and losing at a 1-2 lb per week rate. Nothing to do with the GLP-1…

You are naive and will fight to the end. Continue on your path.

GLP has everything to do with rate, which is what causes the large muscle loss. Gradual lifestyle changes are far more sustainable and healthier on your body.

Sure come back and say they’re not. I really don’t care. Then again I don’t need GLPs. I’m an athlete with a long history of muscle building and lifestyle sustainability. So just like you think popping a pill is magic with no long term data - I think healthy diet and exercise is magic with long term data and sustainability.

Do you have any citations? Because I do. There’s no evidence that muscle mass loss in GLP-1s is any worse than muscle mass loss from other means.

“There's concern in the general public about how weight loss drugs affect muscle mass, but the presenters emphasize that the data doesn't show GLP-1 analogs have a unique, high level of lean body mass loss compared to other weight loss paradigms.”

https://advances.massgeneral.org/endocrinology/article.aspx?id=1601

I trust Mass General a lot more than I trust an unsubstantiated, anonymous claim on the internet.

Seriously?! You want citations for something so well known it dates back 100s of years of conventional wisdom? You are one of those “dumb” people PP mentioned.

Citations won’t convince me. We haven’t had these drugs long enough to even have the data. Remember the miracle drug fen-phen - this is the same. It’s a miracle until it’s not and we see the long term damage. The FDA approved fen-phen and the hype was the same as it is now. Maybe you are too young to remember that.

I should mention I’m in my 50s so I’ve seen the hype before. I’m also knowingly very bias. I’m 5’3” and 130 lbs - although I wear a size 0-2 - so I’m solid muscle, like really solid.

We have a couple decades of data but you don’t want to believe it because it makes you mad.

+1 Scientists have been studying GLP-1s since the 1980s and the first prescription version was approved in 2005. This is not a new biological substance, and is a natural hormone produced in the gut of healthy bodies.

I am one of those scientists (PhD) - I guarantee you there is a lot that goes into those tests that don’t make it to the public. These drugs are good for people who have medical problems from obesity. I do agree with all the PPs that say if you don’t fall into the category of medical problems due to obesity, you shouldn’t be on them - it’s abuse of its intended purpose and the consequences will be known later. Many drugs stay in the testing phase for decades- it doesn’t mean they are safe. The drug industry pushes certain drugs to be commercialized for profit, so there is lots of pressure to make it widely available. People get rich on selling this to you and those people don’t have to live in your body long term.

Me again - I should have mentioned the risk. There is uncertainty about the impact of GLP drugs on C-cell changes, which means long term they may cause cancer - gastrointestinal a colorectal a not all cancers are the same. We don’t have all the data on this yet, so it’s inconclusive. They lower the risk of cancers in very obese people, because their risk was much higher due to the obesity. They may increase cancer risk in healthy moderately overweight people.

Thank you for your posts.

[Anonymous]

A ton of my friends and a few family members have done various GLPs. They seem to work better long term if the person is committed to healthy habits once they go off the drugs. My friends who won't exercise or watch their diet gain the weight back, because maintaining weight in your 40's and 50's is hard if you're not disciplined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many drugs I plan to use for life. I’ll never get off Zyrtec. I don’t expect Advil taken for today’s headache to work on one next week. I’ll be on birth control until I’m on hormone replacement. I don’t see myself ever stopping using Tretinoin. Both my parents will be on cholesterol drugs for life, so I expect at some point I will be too.

Why is it that when it comes to weight loss medications people are clutching their pearls at the idea that people won’t eventually stop?

Because they want people to stop. And then gain the wait back. Because they hate fat people, because they need someone to feel superior to. This "People will gain it back if they stop!!" stuff is all about driving the narrative that it is somehow "cheating" to use medical intervention for obesity. It's similar to people a generation ago clutching their pearls at the idea that certain folks were "acting uppity."

Consider that we want a healthy society where this type of behavior is not normalized. I want my kids to grow up surrounded by healthy diets and exercise - not people who can’t control themselves and try to take a short cut. There was zero obesity at the turn of the century. There’s no good reason for it now other than people cannot control themselves around junk food that is push through ever media possible - weak minds, weak impulse control, equates to weak society. I don’t want that for my kids to live in. I’m sure you blame your obesity on hormones or something out of your control, but it’s not that or we would see fat mammals in the wild and people would have been obese throughout history.

DP: Only the weak minded would conclude that the current obesity crisis is all about "weak minds." More and more research is learning that the brain is actually controlled by the stomach, not the other way around. The content of the gut controls it all. If your gut does not have the right enzymes or does not produce the correct hormones, and thousands of other chemical processes needed, it changes everything, inlcuding the brain. You may think it is impossible to eat clean and exercise daily and still gain weight or store fat, but research is proving this to be untrue. If the gut can't do what it is supposed to do, your body may never get the signal that it is sated, your brain signals my be switched on and off according to what your gut is and is not able to process, your body may not convert food to energy, your body may default to fat storage in error.

What you believe about food and exercise may work for your genetics and for people whose bodies do not have any genetic or physical alterations caused by the environment or a childhood/lifetine of poor nutrition intake. But in the long and complex process of human energy consumption and utilization (the brain being a benefactor of this, not the driver of it), many things can go wrong and those things can impact literally every part of the human body and brain.

As to animals, you know we can reproduce these problems in lab animals. In the wild, they'd die, so no, you wouldn't see them if these particular changes occurred in the animal population. And if you don't think evironmental polution and decreased food quality are contributing to the decline in health and overall survival of animal populations, you aren't paying attention.

As to human history, obviously no, it has not been static in terms of disease, food availablity, food quality, environmental stimuli, gene pool, pollution, labor and general activitiy of populations, etc, etc. All of this impacts health and even literally changes the human body.

Also, science continues to evolve and challenge things human once tied to moral inferiority and weakness: leprosy is not a curse on sinners; people who don't drink alcohol CAN get liver disease especially from hemochomatosis, so no doc, they weren't lying about alcohol consumption; we now know the kid who can't read wasn't "stupid" he was a smart kid who had dyslexia and wasnt' taught correctly; the other kid wasn't lazy, he had ADD and wasn't taught how to manage it; the kid with the temper wasn't "born bad", he needed medication to correct an easily identified hormonal imbalance; red hair wasn't witchery, it was complex genetics; families weren't "cursed" by the moral failing of an ancestor, they were passing on fatal genetic anomalies; whole communities of children were not genetically unintelligent, they were victims of lead poisoning from chipping paint in their community; and so on. You are linking obesity to a moral failing, when hisotry should have taught you to look to science.

Yes, obesity is on the rise rise. Researchers are trying to learn why. The answer is highly unlikley to lie simply in moral failing and metal weakness. The answers will be far more varied and complex.

The answer is in calorie dense foods that become widely available after WWII and the people that choose these over the natural healthy alternatives. So it’s not a moral failing so much as stupidity and laziness coupled with bad choices. It’s still cheaper to make bread at home and eat beans that had been soaked than from a can and forego the chips, soda, boxed cereal, etc. It’s cheaper and healthier - people just don’t make these choices; instead they make excuses.

It's not a "moral failing"! It's just "stupidity" and "laziness" and "bad choices"!

Ok. Well, you are throwing stones from a glass house with this "stupidity" stuff.

Oh, and I love the push to bake homemade bread -- that's hilarious. The SAHMommies are joining in, shaming us professionals for not having time to bake our own bread and cook beans from scratch all day. Shocker that the stupidity is running rampant with this group ...