https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45907422 (citations)
(i am hopefully that probiotics might be a future path to curating gut microbiota that meets an individual's GLP-1 in vivo production needs based on target metabolic outcome, but immediate intervention is welcome for obvious health reasons at scale)
The overwhelming benefits from GLP-1 are courtesy of weight loss and better blood sugar control. Get those two things under control, with or without GLP-1 drugs, and an enormous array of complications are made less likely.
For people with healthy, ideal diets at an optimal weight and with good blood sugar control, there are only remote, hypothetical benefits. There is some evidence it reduces inflammation and might ward off neurodegenerative disorders, but those likely have more of a relationship with blood sugar spikes, and again lifestyle changes are more impactful.
(Except I’ll note that’s true for more than one hormone, as tirzepatide is both a GLP1 and GIP agonist, and I believe retatrutide is also Glucagon?)
Yes, inflammation is a thing in the medical world. There are actual tests to measure it. Having higher levels is generally considered a negative indicator.
Nobody knows what migraine really is, so this isn't a surprise to them that GLP-1 may help, the main question is; why? So they have another data point proving that gut health has a direct correlation to the brain.
Keep in mind that a lot of the benefits go away once patients come off GLP-1 and we have not seen any studies yet on what happens to people who come off it for long term effects. It may in fact make things even worse and for a lot of people, they may have to stay on it for the rest of their lives.
Not if they increase muscle mass and change their lifestyle, like every physician (and the FDA/pharma companies) recommend.
> It may in fact make things even worse and for a lot of people, they may have to stay on it for the rest of their lives.
It does not. And some people may.
You know what’s worse than taking a GLP-1 forever? Obesity or metabolic syndrome killing you before you get to “forever.”
Bingo. Being obese has so many downstream effects. Anything that helps that is tremendous.
Beyond what others have commented already, especially on obesity and cardiovascular disease, I have to correct this specifically, because it is a very common and honestly understandable misunderstanding people have about these drugs.
While only having appeared in the public consciousness comparatively recently, this class of drugs has been in use for two decades at this stage [0], showcasing a very solid safety profile with well established side-effects [1].
Continued research is important, as is proper prescription and use under the care of a Medical Professional up-to-date on current day evidence based practices (as is the case with all interventions), but to have a proper discussion about these, we shouldn't spread myths such as this being "quickly pushed" out, as these have undergone the clinical trials and regulations established across multiple agencies from multiple governments [2].
Again, it is understandable why these are considered rather new or appeared suddenly, especially if one doesn't take a look into their approval, but I don't see any evidence for them being rushed out or anything of the sort.
[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK572151/
All medicines taken for chronic conditions as this way.
The idea that drugs shouldn't be taken forever just doesn't make any sense. There are plenty of forever diseases, naturally those should require forever drugs.
Diet and exercise.
Biology rarely awards something "forever". Maybe one day we can "fix" obese metabolisms permanently by killing off some receptors etc., but in that case, I would be afraid of intractable long-term effects even more.
Plenty of people take regular doses of caffeine for their entire lives and we don't moralize at them about it.
Another example: low dose metformin is largely considered beneficial for most people, at least in a small way. But very few people who aren’t diabetic take it, as the drawback of possible side effects outweighs the potential benefit for someone who doesn’t have symptoms in the first place.
Same thing here. Would it benefit you? Possibly. Do the risks of side effects outweigh that benefit for someone without symptoms? Also possibly.
If you’re obese, have metabolic syndrome, have T2D, or any other number of issues that we’ve seen GLP-1s (or metformin) help with - then the medications can be a godsend.
It's conceivable that future drug discoveries could safely reduce the amount of lifting required. But the protein requirements will always remain.
(Also have hEDS.)
Clinical trials are designed to treat a very specific subclass of individuals; pharmaceutical companies very carefully choose that subclass in an attempt to help ensure the clinical trials are successful, which is a combination of the following:
- Positive, statistically-significant results. - FDA approval with those results. - Insurance companies willing to pay for the given treatment. - A decent-sized addressable market.
Examples of drugs/medical technologies later getting other indications: - Minoxidil was a drug that only later got its approval to be used as a hair loss treatment; there are currently clinical trials for a more "advanced" minoxidil oral pill for this use case. - Re: GLP-1s: Tirzepatide later got an indication that it effectively treats sleep apnea. There are very many other clinical trials ongoing for GLP-1s, but perhaps most recently, Semaglutide (ozempic) failed to show statistical significance as a treatment for Alzheimer's. - The Galleri blood screening/test. The initial indication they are going for is folk who are at highest risk for cancer (I believe that's individuals between the ages of 50 and 70); however, that's not to say it would be bad for individuals younger or older. But, this is a way to help ensure the earliest product has a successful outcome.
These are ones I know off the top of my head, but I suspect an LLM can give several more examples.
FTFY
(great comment otherwise)
[1]: https://www.goodrx.com/classes/glp-1-agonists/semaglutide-fo...
Makes sense
Source: currently using GLP and seeing reduced positive feedback from alcohol (incidentally)...
It's frustrating because if this combination of things doesn't line up, being busy so that I skip a workout and then drink a glass of wine to relax in the evening would be totally fine. But add a couple more variables that are out of my control, then a migraine will hit me and I can't do anything for two days.
I can see that a drug which reduced my craving for things like chocolate, coffee, wine, food - especially at times when I'm stressed and my willpower is low - might have large results on reducing my migraines.
Then with all that use in the wild you could rock and roll. Only problem is that off-label use like me with my retatrutide makes some population studies less effective than before.
No research out on, say, alcoholism yet, but I'd hazard a guess the results are the same.
This is not a cravings loss drug but largely a cravings management drug. Which is still pretty great but it saddles healthcare funding systems with an enormous burden for the next 20 years. Or you keep it private, which means you introduce an enormous gulf of health inequality.
I hate that our solution to obesity is not the way Iceland treated it's youth drinking problem: reduce access to the harmful thing, give people money and support to do the healthy thing. Stick with it instead of cancelling the program if it doesn't show results in 4 years.
Modern food (started in the 80s) has carefully been engineered to be as addictive as possible, health consequences be damned. Let's start fixing the problem there.
Semaglutide goes off-patent in 2032 in the US, and in 2026 in Canada and China:
https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/stlr/blog/vi...
I don't think that framing is right, from another study:
* 17.5% maintained 75+% of their weight loss
* 25% maintained 50-75% of their weight loss
* 23% maintained 25-50% of their weight loss
* 24% maintained 0-25% of their weight loss
At least 75% (possibly more!) maintained some form of weight loss 25% to 75%+. That is tremendous. And 43% maintained 50%+! For reducing being overweight, that is just amazing.
> I hate that our solution to obesity is not the way Iceland treated it's youth drinking problem: reduce access to the harmful thing, give people money and support to do the healthy thing. Stick with it instead of cancelling the program if it doesn't show results in 4 years.
I don't think it's possible to "reduce access to the harmful thing" when that thing is "food".
Many people show long term results even stopping it. I don't understand this desire to say "people should suffer!" instead of taking something that helped them.
Plenty of people have tried (me included) but if it was easy to lose weight, nobody would be long term overweight.
Religion is my assumption. Or human nature more generically. Gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins in Christianity. So it is a moral issue for many people.
I wonder when the first person understood how it worked. (if anyone understands it now?)
It's likely going to be true for GLP-1 as well.
Google AI tells me:
> The main downsides of statins include muscle pain, weakness, and fatigue, and a small increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes.
Are there others?Either that or out-of-touch fitness people who push overly restrictive diets and workout plans. Which work, but actually no they don't, because nobody with a sane mind would want to stick to them. And now you're back at square one but you also have a disdain for food and exercise.
If the answer is yes, well all right.
If the answer is no, weaken the effects until you see what crosses the threshold of "should we study this more?".
However, not an expert on headaches and can't say if it has anything to do with the migraines in the article. But the point that reducing sugar helps in a myriad of ways, stands and is worth repeating.
As a kid I had nearly daily migraines - go into a very dark quiet room and be happy when I fell asleep, since I knew the migraine wouldn't be there when I woke up.
These days it's just headaches, 99% sure it's muscle tension in my neck. Kinda doubt GLP-1 could do anything for that, but I'd be pleasantly surprised....
These things do way way more than just appetite and craving suppression.
Why Does Ozempic Cure All Diseases?
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/why-does-ozempic-cure-all-d...I highly recommend it.
(Note: FOR SOME, not all, probably a small minority could be all)
Anecdotal evidence, anyone?
For me, prechewing pasta thoroughly knocked off 12-16 from my glucose level. (Converting carbs to dextrose in the mouth?).
blakesterz•9h ago
llm_nerd•9h ago
I started medication to treat the BP -- telmisartan and amlodipine -- and my BP dropped from 150+/120+ to 115/80. The migraines completely disappeared. I still infrequently get the visual aura that would traditionally precede a migraine, but nothing follows. I haven't had a migraine in the years I've had my BP under control.
awakeasleep•9h ago
znd•9h ago
RossBencina•9h ago
Bloating•9h ago
Family history of migraines and seizures, which some hypothesize have the same root causes. Would be interesting to see GLP-1 tests on epilepsy.
RossBencina•9h ago
cheald•8h ago
What has helped, interestingly, is supplemented creatine HCl (she went with hcl because it's absorbed substantially faster than monohydrate). We've learned that depletion of neural ATP levels can result in an energy crisis which results in cortical spreading depression, which stimulates the release of CGRP. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/spreading-...)
She's found that a) daily supplementation of creatine has reduced her headache days, and b) an immediate dose of creatine upon onset of a headache frequently aborts or mitigates it. Her need for the gepants has dropped to a tiny fraction of what it was prior to starting creatine.
She's tried everything under the sun, had all the scans, tried all the meds and procedures, and creatine and gepants are the only things she's found that have worked. She's not a placebo responder, and hasn't responded to about a zillion other therapies, so we're pretty sure it's not just placebo effect.
francisofascii•9h ago
apple4ever•3h ago