←back to thread

Weight-loss drug found to shrink muscle in mice, human cells

(www.ualberta.ca)
234 points Eumenes | 4 comments | 20 Nov 24 23:53 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
talkingtab ◴[21 Nov 24 01:21 UTC] No.42200046[source]▶
It concerns me how discussions, such as this one go on HN. This is an important topic. With the epidemic of obesity we now find a drug that appeals to a large number of people. This is an important topic as well.

What is the current comment receiving most of the comment?

"That's the sort of headlines that smells like bullshit to me"

That's the sort of comment that smells like bullshit to me. What kind of place is this?

Many times I find the posts on HN interesting, but increasingly these kind of comments make me wonder about Y Combinator. Is this really the best they can do?

And for us readers who are supposed to be so called hackers, is this the best we can do?

replies(14): >>42200140 #>>42200198 #>>42200215 #>>42200239 #>>42200243 #>>42200320 #>>42200334 #>>42200342 #>>42200368 #>>42200458 #>>42200512 #>>42200524 #>>42200579 #>>42200899 #
NotYourLawyer ◴[21 Nov 24 02:06 UTC] No.42200342[source]▶
To be fair, that comment was about the claim:

> emerging research showing that up to 40 per cent of the weight lost by people using weight-loss drugs is actually muscle

Which is… obviously bullshit.

replies(3): >>42200365 #>>42200442 #>>42200678 #
_heimdall ◴[21 Nov 24 02:22 UTC] No.42200442[source]▶
The source article links to a reference for the 40 percent claim, which itself links to a couple articles that aren't available without a JAMA account.

I can't read the original sources there, but what makes you say its obviously bullshit?

replies(1): >>42200820 #
1. bcoates ◴[21 Nov 24 03:29 UTC] No.42200820[source]▶
From the abstract:

"Studies suggest muscle loss with these medications (as indicated by decreases in fat-free mass [FFM]) ranges from 25% to 39% of the total weight lost over 36–72 weeks. This substantial muscle loss can be largely attributed to the magnitude of weight loss, rather than by an independent effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists, although this hypothesis must be tested. By comparison, non-pharmacological caloric restriction studies with smaller magnitudes of weight loss result in 10–30% FFM losses."

The "surprising" part is kinda bullshit, and implies there's something special about glp-1s. It is the opposite of surprising that weight loss includes a lean mass loss.

That said, being skinnyfat is probably bad for you and the idea that you should work to preserve/build muscle and not only lose weight is a good one.

replies(1): >>42200950 #
2. mr_toad ◴[21 Nov 24 03:58 UTC] No.42200950[source]▶
FFM isn’t entirely muscle, but what other weight would be shed when losing FFM other than muscle?
replies(2): >>42200995 #>>42201020 #
3. nordsieck ◴[21 Nov 24 04:07 UTC] No.42200995[source]▶
> FFM isn’t entirely muscle, but what other weight would be shed when losing FFM other than muscle?

I'm not an expert, but I have to imagine that most of it is muscle.

After dramatic weight loss, a person will probably lose some bone - particularly in the lower body - due to decreased loading.

I know body builders sometimes eat extremely high protein diets (more than 1 g/lbs of body weight) and lift quite hard to try to hang on to as much muscle mass as possible. And they still lose some when cutting.

4. cthalupa ◴[21 Nov 24 04:10 UTC] No.42201020[source]▶
Water weight is a big one, and is part of your FFM. I lost 10lb of water weight in my first 24 hours on tirzepatide.

Some of it is likely bone density as well. You can prevent the bone density and muscle loss with proper diet and exercise, though.