Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

It is hard to do both of these things. From what I’ve read, middle age weight gain does impact health. Especially visceral/belly fat. Concurrently, cholesterol goes up, and plaques in arteries begin. While not our fault, it’s also not misogyny. Tools available are HRT, GLPs, other lifestyle modifications, etc. which all have pros, cons, and risks... in some cases a lot of risks and other complications. Unfortunately there is no easy solution. But to believe there are no health implications to gaining the weight is misleading thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reconnected with a group of college friends and we met up for dinner. Every single one looks fantastic - maybe even better in their mid 40s than their 20s. I came to find out that 3 of the 4 women are on GLPs which helped them lose 10-20 lbs (none were overweight) and now they are just micro dosing to maintain. They all said they feel better then they have in years, didn’t have bad side effects, and focus on eating protein so they don’t lose muscle.

Anyway, here I am struggling to lose 10-15 lbs like always - restricting my calories, working out a ton, etc, and barely seeing the scale move. Every time I do lose it it ends up coming back again.

Just wondering why I don’t take the easier route like so many others. I would need to find a doctor to prescribe it since my PCP won’t (despite telling me my BMI is too high and I need to focus on losing 10-15 lbs).

This is why no one talks to you about it. You are a judgey friend. No one needs that in their life.

Not OP but it’s true. It is the easier route. Exercising hard annd regularly at the same time as restricting calories when you work full time and are raising kids is hard. Injecting yourself with weight-loss drugs that work = easy.

Ok I'm going to blow your mind here. I've been getting up at 5am to exercise 5 days/week (3 days lifting, 2 days cardio) and walking at least 8k+ steps per day for 3 years. I've dutifully tracked macros nearly every single day. I meal prepped breakfast and lunch and thoughtfully planned dinners. I lost 12 pounds and then got stuck for 2 years+.

I'm on Zepbound now and I still do all of those things. But now, I've dropped 14 pounds in 2.5 months-- on a "starter"-- not even therapeutic dose. I'm sure there are people who use it to suppress their appetite and when they do eat, eat like shit and don't exercise. But my point is for those of us trying to make lasting changes that support health its STILL hard, albeit admittedly not as frustrating as it used to be.

My questions are: how much do you weightlift? Or “lift”? How heavy? What kind of cardio do you do and how long? Light weights and walking are not enough no matter if you wake up at 5am.

I’m struck by your assumption that I must be doing it wrong. No, I lift heavy. My current hip thrust is 145, back squat about 130, RDL around 120. My upper body is comparatively weaker, about 80lbs for various presses (bench, incline, overhead). I do drop sets focused on progressive overload. Cardio changed over the 3 years. Sometimes incline walks at brisk pace, sometimes cycling a la peloton, sometimes cardio dance classes, etc. I ate at least 130g of protein a day. Typically 1550 calories some periods I went lower. I wasn’t super obese, I was on the border of overweight and obese.

Are you suggesting every person in the normal weight range does at least this? We both know that’s not accurate.

I’m not looking for a trophy for being the hardest worker. My point is just the disdain for taking the “easy” way is unjustified. Plenty of people tried really hard before and continue to try hard while taking the drugs.

Wouldn’t not soundly

I soundly have started this unless I was already lifting and had muscle I could maintain. I teach 5 fitness classes a week, two of them lifting classes.
Tirz is just a tool in my toolbox. It’s working exactly how’s it’s intended and I did months of research before I started.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that anybody questioning the use of these drugs for vanity is being shouted down is telling. It’s a discussion forum - you know, for discussion.

And no, people that disagree with you are not trolls. People here constantly use that word without understanding what it means.

Can you actually post any legitimate studies that say we should not be using them? Or are you just one of those annoying people constantly "wondering" and "asking questions" because you have formed an uninformed opinion for whatever reason?

You can’t even handle some amount of grey. Instead you default to “should not be using them.” It’s pathetic.

Here are a small handful I found in 30 seconds:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40181228/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40320499/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10832506/

Maybe you should send these researchers an email shouting them down for asking questions.

Muscle mass??????? Really???? That's the best you got???

+1. People who lose weight usually lose muscle mass in addition to fat mass, so it’s no surprise that it also happens when using a GLP. This paper says 20% of lost weight is muscle mass and the other 80% is fat mass. There’s no comparison in the abstract to non-help induced weight loss, so it ‘s meaningless in that sense.

Unless you don’t have much muscle mass to begin with, so you are basically losing more muscle mass on top of not having muscle mass from not working on from weight training etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that anybody questioning the use of these drugs for vanity is being shouted down is telling. It’s a discussion forum - you know, for discussion.

And no, people that disagree with you are not trolls. People here constantly use that word without understanding what it means.

Can you actually post any legitimate studies that say we should not be using them? Or are you just one of those annoying people constantly "wondering" and "asking questions" because you have formed an uninformed opinion for whatever reason?

You can’t even handle some amount of grey. Instead you default to “should not be using them.” It’s pathetic.

Here are a small handful I found in 30 seconds:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40181228/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40320499/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10832506/

Maybe you should send these researchers an email shouting them down for asking questions.

Muscle mass??????? Really???? That's the best you got???

+1. People who lose weight usually lose muscle mass in addition to fat mass, so it’s no surprise that it also happens when using a GLP. This paper says 20% of lost weight is muscle mass and the other 80% is fat mass. There’s no comparison in the abstract to non-help induced weight loss, so it ‘s meaningless in that sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve heard horror stories about it causing major digestive issues—either severe constipation or the opposite—and that gives me pause every time I think about trying it. I’ve been fighting to loose an extra 15 pounds of menopause weight for while now.

Zepbound doesn’t seem to cause the same kind of side effects that the first GLP meds did. I tried Wegovy and was always nauseous and constipated. I did lose weight but I was tired of feeling bad. Now I’m on a low dose of Zepbound to maintain my weight and I’ve had zero side effects. Maybe a little bit tired the first 2-3 weeks but now I feel great, it keeps my appetite down, and no digestive issues.

Zero side effects here as well. I feel perfectly normal.

Zero side effects that you feel right now. There are most likely longterm effects to these drugs that are not yet clear. The piper always comes to be paid. . .

Says you. I wear glasses and footwear -- technology that has really improved my life. Way more upside than downside.

Decreased risk for cancer, heart attack, stroke, hip and knee problems etc etc… what other long term side effects should we list?

Breast cancer is an obesity driven drug for many whose cancer is estrogen positive. Fat produces estrogen before, during and after menopause. That estrogen feeds estrogen positive breast cancers. I would bet that, as more people take these drugs and less of the population is overweight, that you will see a decrease in breast cancer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reconnected with a group of college friends and we met up for dinner. Every single one looks fantastic - maybe even better in their mid 40s than their 20s. I came to find out that 3 of the 4 women are on GLPs which helped them lose 10-20 lbs (none were overweight) and now they are just micro dosing to maintain. They all said they feel better then they have in years, didn’t have bad side effects, and focus on eating protein so they don’t lose muscle.

Anyway, here I am struggling to lose 10-15 lbs like always - restricting my calories, working out a ton, etc, and barely seeing the scale move. Every time I do lose it it ends up coming back again.

Just wondering why I don’t take the easier route like so many others. I would need to find a doctor to prescribe it since my PCP won’t (despite telling me my BMI is too high and I need to focus on losing 10-15 lbs).

This is why no one talks to you about it. You are a judgey friend. No one needs that in their life.

Not OP but it’s true. It is the easier route. Exercising hard annd regularly at the same time as restricting calories when you work full time and are raising kids is hard. Injecting yourself with weight-loss drugs that work = easy.

Ok I'm going to blow your mind here. I've been getting up at 5am to exercise 5 days/week (3 days lifting, 2 days cardio) and walking at least 8k+ steps per day for 3 years. I've dutifully tracked macros nearly every single day. I meal prepped breakfast and lunch and thoughtfully planned dinners. I lost 12 pounds and then got stuck for 2 years+.

I'm on Zepbound now and I still do all of those things. But now, I've dropped 14 pounds in 2.5 months-- on a "starter"-- not even therapeutic dose. I'm sure there are people who use it to suppress their appetite and when they do eat, eat like shit and don't exercise. But my point is for those of us trying to make lasting changes that support health its STILL hard, albeit admittedly not as frustrating as it used to be.

My questions are: how much do you weightlift? Or “lift”? How heavy? What kind of cardio do you do and how long? Light weights and walking are not enough no matter if you wake up at 5am.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reconnected with a group of college friends and we met up for dinner. Every single one looks fantastic - maybe even better in their mid 40s than their 20s. I came to find out that 3 of the 4 women are on GLPs which helped them lose 10-20 lbs (none were overweight) and now they are just micro dosing to maintain. They all said they feel better then they have in years, didn’t have bad side effects, and focus on eating protein so they don’t lose muscle.

Anyway, here I am struggling to lose 10-15 lbs like always - restricting my calories, working out a ton, etc, and barely seeing the scale move. Every time I do lose it it ends up coming back again.

Just wondering why I don’t take the easier route like so many others. I would need to find a doctor to prescribe it since my PCP won’t (despite telling me my BMI is too high and I need to focus on losing 10-15 lbs).

This is why no one talks to you about it. You are a judgey friend. No one needs that in their life.

Not OP but it’s true. It is the easier route. Exercising hard annd regularly at the same time as restricting calories when you work full time and are raising kids is hard. Injecting yourself with weight-loss drugs that work = easy.

Ok I'm going to blow your mind here. I've been getting up at 5am to exercise 5 days/week (3 days lifting, 2 days cardio) and walking at least 8k+ steps per day for 3 years. I've dutifully tracked macros nearly every single day. I meal prepped breakfast and lunch and thoughtfully planned dinners. I lost 12 pounds and then got stuck for 2 years+.

I'm on Zepbound now and I still do all of those things. But now, I've dropped 14 pounds in 2.5 months-- on a "starter"-- not even therapeutic dose. I'm sure there are people who use it to suppress their appetite and when they do eat, eat like shit and don't exercise. But my point is for those of us trying to make lasting changes that support health its STILL hard, albeit admittedly not as frustrating as it used to be.

The only way I've successfully lost weight (I'm 55 now) in the last few years is by eating twice a day within an 8 hr window. I gain a few pounds every school year and every summer I get rid of those pounds by time restricted eating (ends up being fewer calories in a day) and eating higher fats and protein. Breakfast is avocado toast or an omelet with a bit of berries and nuts. I'm stuffed after these because they are full of healthy fat. I don't snack because breakfast fills me up. Dinner is done by 6pm and then I don't eat again until 10am. Works every year and fairly quickly too. I'm down 6 pounds in the last three weeks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

I agree with this. I think this highlights the hormonal nature of this weight gain and how the glps are helpful with that. I only started a few weeks ago and I am tracking my eating now as I have done for years - I am eating literally exactly the same as I was before (very healthily and in the 1200-1500 range) and now I am dropping a couple of pounds a week. My body was just holding onto it all before and now it is not. I am excited that I am finally on the road to losing these extra 20lb! And for me, no side effects at all.

Isn’t that an unusual response, though? For most people it curbs appetite and thus reduces overall calorie intake?

DP - Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And no, it is not unusual, my experience was also quite similar. Insulin resistance is a real thing.

I’m not following. The first PP said she is eating literally exactly the same. How is that not mutually exclusive with reducing calories?

Calories were already reduced. Most women I know restrict their intake as a matter of habit. Never seen a woman take a second helping of dessert.

What a naive post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

I agree with this. I think this highlights the hormonal nature of this weight gain and how the glps are helpful with that. I only started a few weeks ago and I am tracking my eating now as I have done for years - I am eating literally exactly the same as I was before (very healthily and in the 1200-1500 range) and now I am dropping a couple of pounds a week. My body was just holding onto it all before and now it is not. I am excited that I am finally on the road to losing these extra 20lb! And for me, no side effects at all.

Isn’t that an unusual response, though? For most people it curbs appetite and thus reduces overall calorie intake?

DP - Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And no, it is not unusual, my experience was also quite similar. Insulin resistance is a real thing.

I’m not following. The first PP said she is eating literally exactly the same. How is that not mutually exclusive with reducing calories?

Calories were already reduced. Most women I know restrict their intake as a matter of habit. Never seen a woman take a second helping of dessert.

Not in front of you, sure.

Lots of people are secret eaters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

I agree with this. I think this highlights the hormonal nature of this weight gain and how the glps are helpful with that. I only started a few weeks ago and I am tracking my eating now as I have done for years - I am eating literally exactly the same as I was before (very healthily and in the 1200-1500 range) and now I am dropping a couple of pounds a week. My body was just holding onto it all before and now it is not. I am excited that I am finally on the road to losing these extra 20lb! And for me, no side effects at all.

Isn’t that an unusual response, though? For most people it curbs appetite and thus reduces overall calorie intake?

DP - Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And no, it is not unusual, my experience was also quite similar. Insulin resistance is a real thing.

I’m not following. The first PP said she is eating literally exactly the same. How is that not mutually exclusive with reducing calories?

Calories were already reduced. Most women I know restrict their intake as a matter of habit. Never seen a woman take a second helping of dessert.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

I agree with this. I think this highlights the hormonal nature of this weight gain and how the glps are helpful with that. I only started a few weeks ago and I am tracking my eating now as I have done for years - I am eating literally exactly the same as I was before (very healthily and in the 1200-1500 range) and now I am dropping a couple of pounds a week. My body was just holding onto it all before and now it is not. I am excited that I am finally on the road to losing these extra 20lb! And for me, no side effects at all.

Isn’t that an unusual response, though? For most people it curbs appetite and thus reduces overall calorie intake?

DP - Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And no, it is not unusual, my experience was also quite similar. Insulin resistance is a real thing.

I’m not following. The first PP said she is eating literally exactly the same. How is that not mutually exclusive with reducing calories?

I am unsure why you are not able to follow. Are you suggesting that GLPs can’t both reduce appetite and change metabolism? Or are you suggesting that people can’t eat the same amount of calories they did before despite a reduced appetite? That used to be called “dieting”.

It’s not that complicated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish we knew how we got here. Maybe these drugs can drastically improve the health of more well to do Americans but they were not needed 50 years ago. What did we do to our food and lifestyle that drug companies get this boon?

There is obesity and extreme weight due to overconsumption of junk, our horrible food supply, and the use of glp to really help counterbalance all this.

But I think the middle aged women who are 15lbs overweight now were 15lbs overweight in the 50s too, in the 19th century…we just don’t have pics in fashion mags showing us these women, but i certainly have these pics of the women in my family, as many others do: women who worked hard and ate simple foods but were not thin and gained weight in peri. So is the solution to try and conform to the new standards thanks to glp, try with great effort to lose weight other ways, or just accept some weight gain while not neglecting general health? I’m struggling with that myself. So much of it is society and misogyny at play and it’s both hard to ignore and shitty on some level to cater to.

I agree with this. I think this highlights the hormonal nature of this weight gain and how the glps are helpful with that. I only started a few weeks ago and I am tracking my eating now as I have done for years - I am eating literally exactly the same as I was before (very healthily and in the 1200-1500 range) and now I am dropping a couple of pounds a week. My body was just holding onto it all before and now it is not. I am excited that I am finally on the road to losing these extra 20lb! And for me, no side effects at all.

Isn’t that an unusual response, though? For most people it curbs appetite and thus reduces overall calorie intake?

DP - Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And no, it is not unusual, my experience was also quite similar. Insulin resistance is a real thing.

I’m not following. The first PP said she is eating literally exactly the same. How is that not mutually exclusive with reducing calories?

Have you ever heard of somebody taking a drug like prednisone and eating the exact same food but gaining weight?

No, because steroids increase fluid retention and appetite. People actually eat more.