Semaglutide (also known as Ozempic and Wegovy) does not negatively impact brain health and might even be helpful to lower the risk of memory problems, dementia, and nicotine dependence.
In this study, people (20,000 in each cohort) on semaglutide for Type 2 Diabetes were at a lower risk of cognitive deficit, dementia, and nicotine dependence than matched cohorts of people on other anti-diabetic drugs.
If confirmed in randomised controlled trials, these findings would have important implications for patients, service providers, and public health. They would be particularly welcomed in psychiatry as many people with mental illness also have diabetes and vice versa.
At the cost of a rotten intestine and blindness
Well, that's all medication for you. It's always a matter of weighing the pros and cons. If you're diabetic, and have you to take some treatment, you might at least choose the one that will less affect your brain. Healthy people, on the other hand, would feel more cons than pros. Don't mess with your body unless you really need to.
Thats a good point..
The trend nowadays is using semaglutide as weight loss drug.. And thats pretty absurd..
if you have a serious illness, then the picture changes
Yeah I'd never take it for weight loss...
probably a lot healthier than being fat
a few years ago an academic who recognized that we are in a spiritual war, told me to read:
"How to read a paper" by Trisha Greenhalgh
she explains very clearly how most papers are wrong.
money corrupted science a long time ago..
ill try to find this
i now call it scientism : religious dogma masquerading as science
I know one of the authors, let me know if you have any serious questions you'd like answered... about this study, or about pharmaceutical science in general.
"Because this study is observational, it cannot be demonstrated that the observed outcomes are adverse events of medications."
More from the study:
Many of these are problems inherent with observational studies. I think it's fine that these studies are done because they can help drive the kinds of double-blind, controlled patient research to test specific hypotheses. We need to do a better job as a society educating people to understand when a headline is from an observational study and that it shouldn't carry as much weight.
Good to highlight indeed. I didn't know this nuance. It's reassuring they emphasize it themselves in the paper too.
Good catch!
You can get similar results to ozempic on a very low carbohydrate carnivore diet. Diabetics would probably do better eating natural food than taking risky medicines.
I asked a friend who is diabetic. He said diabetics need to avoid junk food and eat vegetables
Nothing gimmicky
Whats "gimmicky" about a low carbohydrate animal based diet?
nothing
The gimmick is risky medicines
Ahh right, my bad.
I should have been more clear
My friend said a diabetic diet is no different from a 'healthy' diet for people in general.
Any non-anecdotical evidence to back this up about the carnivore diet yielding similar results as ozempic? Not being facetious, just curious.
Not that I'm aware of on that specific point. I have searched the literature, but most nutritional research on that topic just demonizes red meat with low quality observational studies (they usually advocate high carb plant based diets).
My only "real" evidence is personal and anecdotal. I lost 15kg in three months on a fatty red meat only diet. I eat 2 times per day, I don't feel hungry between meals. My mental function improved significantly, I sleep much better, and stopped snoring. I was pre-diabetic, and my blood sugar would take a long time to come down after meals (now normal). I managed to cut my serious alcohol addiction (of 15 years). There are many thousands of others with the same story.
There are doctors and academics in the space that have noticed this and are hearing the anecdotes, and they are in the process of conducting clinical research. I'm on my phone right now, so its a pain to pull up the details , but I will post some links later if I remember.
Eagerly awaiting such studies. Diet science has a very flawed history of strong convictions that turned out wrong. Like the demonisation of fat in my childhood while feeding kids pure sugar for energy... We've come a long way since. Good thing that, overall, science is self correcting in the long run.
#604976
Questions: