New help for Obesity? Maybe yes!" says Derek!!!

Notes: it is in Phase III, FDA is good with it so far, it is an injectable.
 
I wonder if their branching out from Insulin has anything to do with Obamacare requiring generics for the expensive, copyrighted insulins? I'm seeing prices dropping now, from $70 to $25. And maybe on the $280 bottles, next week when I need a refill.

Hmmm, take the profit out of the treatment, and maybe see a preventative?
 
casebro said:
I wonder if their branching out from Insulin has anything to do with Obamacare requiring generics for the expensive, copyrighted insulins? I'm seeing prices dropping now, from $70 to $25. And maybe on the $280 bottles, next week when I need a refill.

Hmmm, take the profit out of the treatment, and maybe see a preventative?
Click to expand...

That would certainly be grand!!!!!
 
One problem, as I see it, is that obesity is not always driven by hunger. Obese people may eat for a variety of reasons. Gotta treat the whole person.
 
mijopaalmc said:
You can't treat insulin-insensitive diabetes with insulin.
Click to expand...

I hadn't heard that term before. Because it was replaced with "insulin resistant". Or Type II.

And yes we do get treated with insulin. It just takes lots of it. At my peak weight and peak dose, 220 units/day. Where as a type I takes umm 20?

Diet and exercise is also good treatment. Loss of 90 pounds by doing a marathon equivalent per day made me asymptomatic. Until my carbs crept up, and my weight.

Motivation is all psychological. And the fact that Psychologists can't fix fat makes me have doubt that they can fix anything. So chemicals may be a good idea.
 
SezMe said:
One problem, as I see it, is that obesity is not always driven by hunger. Obese people may eat for a variety of reasons. Gotta treat the whole person.
Click to expand...

Eating without hunger is hard work, regardless of other motivations.
 
The Greater Fool said:
I have experience that says otherwise.
Click to expand...

Then you really didn't have a lack of hunger/appetite. I'm sure most people have had the experience of being stuffed to the gills but still hungry. Most people don't experience the opposite, an empty stomach and complete satiety. When it does happen, it takes effort to eat enough.
 
SezMe said:
One problem, as I see it, is that obesity is not always driven by hunger. Obese people may eat for a variety of reasons. Gotta treat the whole person.
Click to expand...

This.

Many obese people do a lot of "comfort eating" that has little to do with hunger. Eating can make people feel good but can lead to problems. For some people with overeating issues they feel bad, so they eat, then they feel guilty for eating (thus feel bad), yet can't help but eat again to feel better -- a vicious cycle. Others started putting on the pounds after a traumatic event like the death of a family member.

Not sure if this new treatment would have an impact on that those kind of eating problems.
 
Modified said:
Eating without hunger is hard work, regardless of other motivations.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant here. I read this as "Eating when one is not hungry is hard work, regardless of why you eat."
Did you mean something else?
Modified said:
Then you really didn't have a lack of hunger/appetite. I'm sure most people have had the experience of being stuffed to the gills but still hungry. Most people don't experience the opposite, an empty stomach and complete satiety. When it does happen, it takes effort to eat enough.
Click to expand...
I also believe you are conflating "hunger" and "appetite." They are completely different things.

I have had hunger, and not eating then takes effort for most folks (hence why diets fail 95% of the time). I have also had NO hunger, and easily eaten considerably.

I can't say I've had the experience of "eating to the gills" and still being hungry. I have, on the other hand, "eaten to the gills" and still had an appetite, and a desire to eat.

I guess I'm missing the point you are trying to make.
 
The Greater Fool said:
I also believe you are conflating "hunger" and "appetite." They are completely different things.
Click to expand...

I believe you are making them different things, when they are the same. Is your definition of "hunger" just a certain degree or higher of appetite, or is there some other difference?
 
Modified said:
I believe you are making them different things, when they are the same. Is your definition of "hunger" just a certain degree or higher of appetite, or is there some other difference?
Click to expand...

hun-ger
noun
1. a compelling need or desire for food.
2. the painful sensation or state of weakness caused by the need of food:
"to collapse from hunger."
3. a shortage of food; famine.
4. a strong or compelling desire or craving.

ap-pe-tite
noun
1. a desire for food or drink:
2. a desire to satisfy any bodily need or craving.
3. a desire or liking for something; fondness; taste.
 
I'm not a couch potato. But when I can't go outside and be active, I sit at the computer and get drawn towards the refrigerator. You got it right, no couch potato, I'm a Refrigerator Magnet. ;)
 
The Greater Fool said:
hun-ger
noun
1. a compelling need or desire for food.
2. the painful sensation or state of weakness caused by the need of food:
"to collapse from hunger."
3. a shortage of food; famine.
4. a strong or compelling desire or craving.

ap-pe-tite
noun
1. a desire for food or drink:
2. a desire to satisfy any bodily need or craving.
3. a desire or liking for something; fondness; taste.
Click to expand...

Those definitions of for hunger don't match the common usage of the negative though. When someone says they're "not hungry", it generally doesn't mean they don't have a strong or compelling desire for food, it means they don't have any desire at all; while "a bit hungry" falls between the two. I would equate "no hunger" with the common meaning for "not hungry".
 
Sounds great, but what they really need to do is make a pill that makes exercising more fun than sitting on your butt and watching TV.
 
Last edited:
Modified said:
Eating without hunger is hard work, regardless of other motivations.
Click to expand...
Tell that to all the people who watch football on weekends with the obligatory bag of chips and a high calorie dip at their fingertips. To say nothing of the suds.

Another example: are the millions of people who go out for a drink after work really thirsty?
 
Modified said:
Those definitions of for hunger don't match the common usage of the negative though. When someone says they're "not hungry", it generally doesn't mean they don't have a strong or compelling desire for food, it means they don't have any desire at all; while "a bit hungry" falls between the two. I would equate "no hunger" with the common meaning for "not hungry".
Click to expand...

Words have meaning. Trying to use some round about rationalization doesn't change their meanings. Especially when talking about diets, drugs, and obesity, the very important difference between "hunger" and "appetite" cannot be rationalized by "common misuse."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom