Neuroscientist Dr Andrew Huberman: "The moment that GLP1s hit the compounding pharmacy market, the wellness community changed their tune."

[scout5]

Neuroscientist Dr Andrew Huberman: The Moment That GLP1s Hit The Compounding Pharmacy Market, The Wellness Community Changed Their Tune

Stanford neuroscientist Dr. Andrew Huberman has observed a shift in how the wellness community discusses weight loss treatments, particularly GLP-1 agonists like Ozempic and Wegovy. During a recent podcast appearance, Huberman…

calfkicker.com

 

[neo6488]

1. They were new and so far every decent weight loss medicine has had devastating short and long term issues.

2. It was a drug you either needed to have excellent insurance, or be rich to get.

3. People were ashamed to use it. So many celebrities that had been heavy for decades suddenly got skinny and had found a "renewed interest" in walking and wellness.

 

[byefatlicia]

"The medications show promise beyond weight management. Emerging research suggests GLP-1s may effectively reduce cravings for alcohol and sugar in people with alco hol use disorder"

For a new article, they don't really state the latest info. Like a reduction in addiction in general and the anti-inflammatory effects

 

[tubby]

There's a lot of junk science in the weight loss and nutrition space that's really hard to break out of so I understand the hesitation towards GLP1s before properly investigating them. I was there too a year ago and it was only my background in other fringe nutrition corners that allowed me realize and appreciate what they actually were (VS pre-conceived notions of what they were). It took reading about the advance that retatrutide represented for me to "get" it.

Most "experts" are still convinced that CICO is a valid and useful tool for achieving sustained weight loss AND that these compounds work by enabling people eat less on a short-term basis. From that perspective it makes perfect sense they'd fail to appreciate and understand what is actually going on. They just see it as a temporary crutch and can't see past their own blind spots, unable to see incretin hormone manipulation as more than just appetite suppression.

 

[Jerrey]

In the last year this same basic article has been republished a dozen times over. Nothing new or news worthy here moving on.

 

[Calm Logic]

There's a lot of junk science in the weight loss and nutrition space that's really hard to break out of so I understand the hesitation towards GLP1s before properly investigating them. I was there too a year ago and it was only my background in other fringe nutrition corners that allowed me realize and appreciate what they actually were (VS pre-conceived notions of what they were). It took reading about the advance that retatrutide represented for me to "get" it.

Most "experts" are still convinced that CICO is a valid and useful tool for achieving sustained weight loss AND that these compounds work by enabling people eat less on a short-term basis. From that perspective it makes perfect sense they'd fail to appreciate and understand what is actually going on. They just see it as a temporary crutch and can't see past their own blind spots, unable to see incretin hormone manipulation as more than just appetite suppression.

Amen. Even some people on GLPs just see GLPs as a crutch in their CICO universe.

 

[Thistley]

I have to say that I was a believer in CICO because that was all I ever heard from…. Anyone in the medical, sports and nutrition and wellness fields.

It’s wild how much conflicting information Is out there for ordinary folks to try to understand. The evidence is in the obesity rate in the population ( of course there are other factors like genes, cost, availability, upbringing, myths & marketing, poor mental/emotional health and self esteem, cooking skills, time, hidden / shady food packaging etc the list is endless)

Only on this long GLP1 journey have I realised that is not true- or at least not that simple. I have had mannnny weeks now of eating one meal a day, and a small snack, and fasting 15 hours. Each meal has Protein, carbs and leafy/ cruciferous rainbow of veg.

So I wasn’t eating no 2000 cals in that one meal and small snack either ( nuts/fruit) Yet there were many weeks that I stayed the same or gained a pound. I had weeks of losing and gaining the same pound on plateau. Sometimes I would gain 3-5 If I had my period and according to CICO that is impossible. I couldn’t understand it.

Other weeks I can eat well/ pretty much what I want ( like I observed many skinny people do- just less of it) and still lose 1-2lbs.

Hard to believe how lied to I feel - now I can see what’s what and live like a normal person with a normal attitude to food - because of GLP1s.

I think an interest in wellness makes sense when you actually start to…. Feel and look well. When you feel and look like shit, doing pigeon pose in expensive yoga pants, with the local teensy tiny matcha swigging yummy mummy’s seems like a million miles from any life you could ever live

 

[Grogu]

Hard to believe how lied to I feel - now I can see what’s what and live like a normal person with a normal attitude to food - because of GLP1s.

When I first started tirzepatide, I told myself I wasn’t going to do CICO (an approach that had always worked for me) because “normal” people don’t count everything they eat. And tirzepatide has really allowed me to have a “normal” relationship with food for the most part.

Most of my journey I haven’t counted, but I’m counting now, more to track macros to make sure I’m getting enough protein, fat, and carbs and not so much to restrict calories. But it’s always amazing to me what a portion looks like. For example, I love cashews and pistachios. The serving size (per the food packager) is 1oz of cashews for 180 calories. I take out my food scale and 1oz is not a lot. Before tirzepatide I could have easily eaten 4oz as a snack at night while watching TV. That would be almost 800 calories at night. No wonder why I was so overweight. And that’s just one thing in my diet. I would normally eat as an afternoon snack cheese and crackers. Probably 4oz of cheese, total calories with the crackers was probably another 800 calories.

Yes, weight loss is a complicated process, it’s definitely not only CICO, but unfortunately (in my opinion) CICO is part of the process. Don’t get me wrong, tirzepatide is a miracle drug for me and many others, but at least for me it doesn’t allow me to eat whatever I want in excess and not gain weight. So, I don’t think that CICO is a total lie, but can see how it would seem that way.

 

[CallieKat]

The wellness community is still in deep denial about how they have become largely obsolete. Now that calorie intake and metabolism is largely fixed for a huge percent of us on a GLP (whatever generation) they can’t capitalize upon the 95 percent failure rate of diet and exercise.

Focusing on protein intake and doing keeping your muscles stimulated doesn’t require fancy gym memberships or expensive personal trainers.

These wellness folks will have to think outside of the box to stay relevant.

The wellness folks are now trying to focus on saying that you are going to break your hip due to muscle loss if you don’t use us while you are on a glp. That’s fine and all but we don’t need them past a few initial teaching sessions…and many of us already know everything they are teaching because we have been there and done that. We learned what they taught but would quit because we out ate any outward benefits.

Anyways…I will never patronize the fitness/wellness community again. Joining a social activity that focuses on fitness is the only reason I would pay. I know how to do the rest on my own.

 

[tubby]

I should probably clear up the CICO comment:

CICO isn't wrong. By definition CICO is correct. It's just not at all useful for achieving sustained weight loss. A person can intuitively understand that if they keep eating the same thing, but less of it, that they'll probably get smaller. Also, if they keep eating the same thing but eat more of it, they'll probably get bigger. You don't need to resort to thermodynamics to understand such a self-evident notion and it was likely understood before the first law of thermodynamics (energy balance) was ever uttered.

The problem with CICO is that (outside of highly controlled conditions), it's impossible for us to accurately determine what CI is or to predict what CO will be.

Incomplete digestion, breakdown by gut bacteria, food preparation method, and numerous other factors impact CI. A calorie is a calorie rings true in a bomb calorimeter, but not in the digestive tract of a mammal.

And if you thought CI was complicated, that's nothing compared to CO. Your body is continually ramping up and down different functions and the energy demands related to each. This gets all blurred together into something that gets dubbed basal metabolic rate, but in reality not only varies based on activity level, but also varies in response to the kinds of foods being eaten and all sorts of other hormonal triggers.

To the extent CICO exists as a valid concept, it's what is supposed to be driving the hunger and satiety centers of your brain to nudge you towards feeling hungry when you should eat more. People don't get fat because they screwed up the calorie math on their McDonald's value meal and forgot to carry a 10. They get fat because processed food companies design their products to be addictive and to override this natural mechanism in your brain so that you'll eat more of their ultra-palatable foods. And that is perfectly rational behavior. If one restaurant makes their food taste "really really good," customers will flock to that restaurant over the one that doesn't employ such tricks. "Whole foods" isn't on its own sufficient to escape this outcome, but it's certainly a step in the right direction towards avoiding modern "really really good" taste and addiction engineering.

So CICO is a perfectly reasonable way to explain what happened to your body weight over the last month. You lost 5 pounds so we know you achieved a 17,500 (or whatever) kilocalorie deficit (by definition). But unless you're being subject to highly controlled conditions (e.g. metabolic ward), it's going to be utterly useless in predicting what results over the next month.

Pretending that CICO is the solution to weight loss is on par with telling a heroin addict that stopping heroin is the solution to their problem. And the proper response is: No shit, now tell me how I do that in a way where I'm not focused on food and how hungry I am 24/7?

GLPs are just one tool of many for sustained weight loss. Really, it's about breaking the addiction to large amounts of highly palatable food and figuring out what "healthy food" means. Everybody thinks they know the answer to that one too due to all the nonsense spouted by dieticians. If you're able to see that breaking addiction is the first step, that's good, but they still have you largely trapped by the rest of the junk they propagate by fixating on nonsense like saturated fat, whole grains, superfoods, vitamins, and other topics where there is often some truth to what they're saying so it's easy to assume they know the full story when they do not.

 

[Calm Logic]

When CICO goes wrong: "How little can I eat today?"

When CICO goes right (though common sense): Per calorie, a baked potato is more filling than potato chips.

But at least for higher doses of GLPs: "Am I eating enough to keep my energy level from going to shit (and to prevent muscle loss)?"

 

[Sasquatch]

Pretending that CICO is the solution to weight loss is on par with telling a heroin addict that stopping heroin is the solution to their problem. And the proper response is: No shit, now tell me how I do that in a way where I'm not focused on food and how hungry I am 24/7?

I've said it before, " I've never lost a f'ing pound in sixty years. "

I have seen some some fads, that even include hypodermic needles, come and go. Never jumped in. Seen people loose and gain it all back. Time will tell, but if doc thought it was OK, this time, it probably is.

They used to burry 80% of the people that were diagnosed with cancer that are now still walking around. Good time to be alive.

 

[Chili777]

Really, it's about breaking the addiction to large amounts of highly palatable food and figuring out what "healthy food" means. Everybody thinks they know the answer to that one too due to all the nonsense spouted by dieticians. If you're able to see that breaking addiction is

One of the best steps I took when starting GLPs was to buy 9" dinner plates. They used to be the norm in the 60s and 70s. Now they're 12" and even 13" at some restaurants. It might not be a huge deal, but it plays mind games regarding how much food you think you actually have on your plate. I know it did me. I don't build an engineering masterpiece on my plate, either. I plan to keep them even when I taper down after hitting goal.

 

[Ruckus4519]

One of the best steps I took when starting GLPs was to buy 9" dinner plates. They used to be the norm in the 60s and 70s. Now they're 12" and even 13" at some restaurants. It might not be a huge deal, but it plays mind games regarding how much food you think you actually have on your plate. I know it did me. I don't build an engineering masterpiece on my plate, either. I plan to keep them even when I taper down after hitting goal.

This sounds like a great idea. For someone who eats a lot of rice, I was also advised to get black dinnerware, to better see it with contrast.

I should probably stop eating from bowls haha

 

[Chili777]

This sounds like a great idea. For someone who eats a lot of rice, I was also advised to get black dinnerware, to better see it with contrast.

I should probably stop eating from bowls haha

It's worked for me. I adjusted fairly quickly to smaller portions and have kept it on Reta. Sometimes even less. I try to eat clean and you can still get a lot of healthy food on a 9" plate. One thing I gave up was rice. My rice cooker is in the closet. I decided to save those calories for other things. I now get or make riced cauliflower and use that instead, but it's still kind of boring with a stirfry.

 

[Grogu]

I should probably clear up the CICO comment:

CICO isn't wrong. By definition CICO is correct. It's just not at all useful for achieving sustained weight loss. A person can intuitively understand that if they keep eating the same thing, but less of it, that they'll probably get smaller. Also, if they keep eating the same thing but eat more of it, they'll probably get bigger. You don't need to resort to thermodynamics to understand such a self-evident notion and it was likely understood before the first law of thermodynamics (energy balance) was ever uttered.

The problem with CICO is that (outside of highly controlled conditions), it's impossible for us to accurately determine what CI is or to predict what CO will be.

If intuitively eating less was a thing, we wouldn’t have an obesity epidemic. I believe that tons of people have no idea how many calories they consume on a daily basis. Or what a portion size actually looks like.

I personally don’t track CO, except knowing my TDEE as it lowers over time as I lose weight. I don’t take in more calories if I exercise on a given day.

Also, one doesn’t need an exact calculation of CI. Nothing is accurate in life. Even weight on a scale is just an estimate. I aim for 1,800 CI. If I measured wrong and it’s 2,300, no big deal, it’s still less than my TDEE. At least I know it’s not 5,000. Without a little tracking, how do you know you’re not eating too much? And isn’t that the bottom line? Obesity is caused by eating too much?

With tirzepatide, more often than not, I’m pushing more calories in than worrying about restricting calories to reach 1,800. Usually will add a protein shake.

 

[tubby]

If intuitively eating less was a thing, we wouldn’t have an obesity epidemic. I believe that tons of people have no idea how many calories they consume on a daily basis. Or what a portion size actually looks like.

I personally don’t track CO, except knowing my TDEE as it lowers over time as I lose weight. I don’t take in more calories if I exercise on a given day.

Also, one doesn’t need an exact calculation of CI. Nothing is accurate in life. Even weight on a scale is just an estimate. I aim for 1,800 CI. If I measured wrong and it’s 2,300, no big deal, it’s still less than my TDEE. At least I know it’s not 5,000. Without a little tracking, how do you know you’re not eating too much? And isn’t that the bottom line? Obesity is caused by eating too much?

With tirzepatide, more often than not, I’m pushing more calories in than worrying about restricting calories to reach 1,800. Usually will add a protein shake.

And that's a big part of the trap there. No other mammal in nature needs to track calories to maintain a healthy weight. They only run into problems when they're made to eat foods other than their natural diet. For example, cows are fed grain-heavy diets, turning them obese and giving them diabetes (AKA "marbling"). Compare that to grass-fed cows who are in much better health themselves (but also less marbling).

When we eat the highly engineered foods that exist around us, it's not surprising that "intuitive eating" is going to be a lost cause. At the same time, all of these foods are so pervasive and commonplace that trying to untangle a method by which intuitive eating could work is a very challenging endeavor.

 

[Grogu]

When we eat the highly engineered foods that exist around us, it's not surprising that "intuitive eating" is going to be a lost cause. At the same time, all of these foods are so pervasive and commonplace that trying to untangle a method by which intuitive eating could work is a very challenging endeavor.

Yes, we live in an environment that actually promotes obesity. Food is cheap, readily accessible, and of varying nutritional quality. We're not hunter/gatherers like our ancestors or other mammals.

I think that the way to do this without counting (which I totally understand a lot of people don't want to do and/or hate to do) is to just eat three meals a day and two snacks and nothing else. Snacks at 100 calories and the three meals don't need to be counted all the time, once someone knows what a 300 to 500 calorie meal looks like just rinse and repeat.

 

[tubby]

Yes, we live in an environment that actually promotes obesity. Food is cheap, readily accessible, and of varying nutritional quality. We're not hunter/gatherers like our ancestors or other mammals.

I think that the way to do this without counting (which I totally understand a lot of people don't want to do and/or hate to do) is to just eat three meals a day and two snacks and nothing else. Snacks at 100 calories and the three meals don't need to be counted all the time, once someone knows what a 300 to 500 calorie meal looks like just rinse and repeat.

That sounds a lot like the advice you'd typically receive from a dietician or a diabetes educator. Not sure if you've ever attempted such a plan, but in practice most people on such plans are rather miserable due to constantly feeling hungry and feeling like their lives are being run by food. If you paired that with a GLP, it's not going to be quite as bad, but without one, it's going to be a similar experience to being an office worker constantly looking up at the clock for the last hour of their shift, frustratingly waiting for it to finally strike 5PM. Only you get to have that feeling all day long, instead of just the last hour of your shift. And then you feel guilt when you give in to that extra snack or portion, at some point just throwing in the towel entirely and giving up any progress you might have made. It's a great way to put in a month of hard work that feels like a constant struggle, only to have any progress you made given back in a week or two of "going off the wagon," and then feel emotionally conflicted about whether you want to go back to putting in that kind of work again for what very likely will prove to be fleeting results once again. I suspect industry favors promoting that particular plan because it helps people give up and seek paid treatments more quickly, while ensuring people stay locked into their ultra-processed food addiction along the way. I mean it's possible some people will change what they're eating on such diets, but most will opt for the convenience of calorie counts being printed on the side of packaging, which is less often true with the kinds of foods that are more productive for weight loss.