Slashdot Mirror
FDA Approves Implantable Vagus Nerve Disruptor For Weight Loss
The L.A. Times reports that for the first time since 2007, the FDA has approved a weight loss device (as opposed to a weight-loss drug), an implantable device called the Maestro Rechargeable System. Using electrical leads implanted just above the stomach and a regulator carried under the skin near the ribcage, the device suppresses signals carried by the vagus nerve. ... The device adopts a variant of a "neuromodulation" technique long used in the treatment of epilepsy: by applying intermittent bursts of electrical current to the vagus nerve, it disrupts the signals that prompt the stomach to relax, expand and prepare for an influx of food. ... The FDA approved the use of the device in adult patients with a body mass index, or BMI, between 35 and 45, who have at least one other obesity-related condition, such as type 2 diabetes.
The vagus nerve does a lot of really cool things which don't get a lot of appreciation.
Cats purr to self-stimulate it. That's what they're doing when they make that noise. And you can do it also. It orders the mind, creating calm and clarity. When you're affronted with terror or high emotion, "pipe breathe" and within half a minute, you're in the zone, able to think and react with calm precision to high-stress situations. And that's just *one* thing.
So yeah, let's allow big pharma to cyberman our core nervous apparatus for something as incredibly stupid as a weight loss gimmick.
The science on this is not bullet-proof yet, but there are studies that link unexplained panic attacks and associated syndromes to vagus nerve problems. There are multiple theories, including one that proposes that physical symptoms of panic are experienced, and this triggers the psychological ones.
I don't know if this thing will help fat people, but I'd bet a dollar on the fact that it will definitely boost sales of paxil and valium.
lucm, indeed.
It sound like a Klingon weapon.
by Steven Gould, you would not let anyone mess with your vagus nerve.
big pharma
You mean we should only allow "small pharma" to produce weight loss devices? Why, because "big pharma" is too big to do it?
The vagus nerve is an important physiologically but it's not endowed with magical properties. Just saying.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Affecting a nerve to help people regulate their hunger and help them loose weight? There is already a way of doing that and it's called Leptin. Leptin is the hormone that regulates hunger by stimulating receptors in the hypothalamus. When someone suffers from leptin resistance, he will eat all day. The fix? bye bye sugars, bye bye inflammatory foods, bye bye foods with anti-nutrients.
I lost 100lb resetting my leptin cycle, I stopped eating all day and simply wasn't hungry anymore. No will power, no pills, nothing... the anxiety for food just went away.
Here is a nice article with 29 scientific references that explains exactly the importance of Leptin Cycle
And here is a nice video from Stephan Guyenet, Ph.D. explaining it too
Affecting a whole big nerve instead of changing eating habits is a really really bad idea
- Human knowledge belongs to the world
Isn't that the G-spot?
Wait, why am I asking about this on Slashdot?
Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
I just registered "HackMyFoodDevice.com" to exchange ideas on how to fool that damn thing.
People with the rubber bands around their stomach manged to defeat their overload and I am pretty sure we can as well.
Come, visit and don't forget to walk by the buffet over there.....
Everyone who buys Wild Hunt will receive 16 specially prepared DLCs absolutely for free, regardless of platform.
I have a Vegas Nerve. Lost a lot of money on blackjack and hookers.
Table-ized A.I.
Meh it's all very well to start talking about willpower but I mean look at how vaping has exploded lately in lieu of cigarettes. If these devices help reduce obesity, they're saving lives, and that's a good thing.
Cats purr to self-stimulate it. That's what they're doing when they make that noise.
So when I see some fat folks purring, I will know that they are using this device . . . ?
It will be on the side effects list: "Makes you purr."
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Most obesity is due to poor nutrition and lack of exercise. Changing nutrition and exercising costs nothing and has numerous health benefits. Giving people an inferior, costly, and risky substitute for a simple and effective solution is not a good thing.
The vagus nerve is an important physiologically but it's not endowed with magical properties. Just saying.
No, but once again so called medicine is tending towards quackery by mucking about in systems in which they have no clue yet. Stimulation of the Vagus nerve is known to have both positive and negative effects on depression, epilepsy, heart rate, blood pressure, orgasms and a host of other fun stuff that can be awful or grand depending on how it works for the receiver. It's the same shotgun style approach they've been using with SSRI's all these years, the result of which has been a placebo effects, severe anxiety, anger management, even greater depression, teenagers jumping off cliffs and an occasional person whom benefits. I can understand severe cases where there are no other options but the general public shouldn't be used as lab rats to enrich big pharma, the only ones conclusively proven to benefit from stuff like this.
A disruptor will cause you to loose weight - AAAAAAAAAAALL OF IIIIIIIIIIIIIT...
scnr...
I've also been hearing about success in treating tinnitus by stimulation of the Vegas nerve.
46137
When I visit the US, it seems like giant people are everywhere. Overweight and enormous.
The problem is diet and total lack of exercise in most cases. If you stop the coke and Pepsi with every meal, this problem will just go away.
Medical cases there are already solutions for. Quackery.
Yes, let's dismiss all non-pharmaceutical and non-surgical solutions to health problems.
I'm sure in 1,000 years we will still be taking pills and slicing people up - it is certain that we will never progress.
There is a simple solution to obesity: change your diet. It's easy, risk-free, and doesn't cost anything (it actually saves you money).
Hopefully, "in 1,000 years", people will consider neurostimulation, surgery or drugs to "treat" obesity to be barbaric and uneducated.
Mmmmmmm Cheetos mmmmmmmm
so effective! yeah, another scammy "study" from money-hungry academia
when they get old and fat...they never learn...till they get old and fat themselves
You'll just swallow a pill and grow a new kidney.
Ezekiel 23:20
Most obesity is due to poor nutrition and lack of exercise. Changing nutrition and exercising costs nothing and has numerous health benefits. Giving people an inferior, costly, and risky substitute for a simple and effective solution is not a good thing.
Exercising makes you fit, but unless you're an athlete it doesn't burn enough calories to make up for excessive calorie intake. I can usually burn 5-700 calories in an hour, but a Big Mac and 0.5 liter coke will undo that very easily and that's not counting the fries. You can subititute the burger with about 100 grams of potato chips or about three 0.5 liter beers. And if it's not excesses in sugar and fat you can easily overeat on quite ordinary food by simply eating too much.
You can easily overeat by 1000+ calories a day, in fact your body is built to quickly store fat in times of plenty since before refridgerators and preservatives that was the primary means of surviving harsh winters, draughts, bad luck hunting and so. The body is sending you all these wrong messages that you did great to secure all these reserves Except these days we only go up and never down.
Sure, it's just a matter of not eating but that's easier said than done, a nagging hunger is very very annoying. It's like I've grown up in a fairly cold climate, send a person from the tropical regions here and have him dress like me and I swear he'll think it's cold, damn cold. I doubt our bodies are that differntly build physically, but it's not as easy as to say it's all in your head. Maybe it is, but he's still freezing where I'm not. And I'm still hungry even though you're not. It's not fun. Being fat as fuck is also not fun, so I try balancing it out. But it's not easy.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
When you're affronted with terror or high emotion, "pipe breathe" and within half a minute, you're in the zone, able to think and react with calm precision to high-stress situations.
This sounds interesting.
Do you have any links on this?
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
If it were that easy everyone would be doing it. When you start to look at the real reasons for obesity it turns out to be not nearly that simple.
Surgery has proven to be effective, fairly safe and keeps the weight off. The person also needs to make an effort to change their lifestyle, and the surgery is a powerful aid. If this sort of thing is less invasive and more controllable then that's a good thing. Better to deal with it early than wait until someone develops an obesity related illness because the only "help" available was people berating them for personal failings.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Obesity is a major health problem in much of the western world. It's nice to just blame fat people for lack of willpower or moral fibre when you are controlling it, but that doesn't help anyone. Anything that can seriously help people control their weight isn't a gimmick, it's a fix for one of the most common and serious health issues we face.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Well, I don't know who to root for. I completely distrust the medical/cosmetic industry when it comes to selling solutions, especially for cosmetic issues (and this may be mostly health now, but don't kid yourself where it will be funded). On the other hand, the trolls who say it's all will power and fat is purely moral don't have much science behind them, and appear more motivated by "just world fallacy" reasoning (if a person is ill, and it isn't me, they more likely somehow deserve it). Both cost us money, over-prescription, and people who try to "believe-away" real health problems with high society costs.
As for the people who smugly think it's justice for affluent societies like USA, look at how obesity rates rise in nations which go from very poor to moderately poor. Africans, Asians, Latinos, and Europeans are not immune to unintended consequences. News Flash: As the threats of starvation subside, threats of overconsumption increase.
Gently reply
I was hoping it was an implant that would stimulate a woman's G-Spot no matter where it might be hidden.
There is a simple solution to obesity: feel like you're starving all the time.
FTFY. I'm sure you're totally man over nature, showing the third most powerful driver of all life who's boss. (after sleep and thirst, and usually before sex)
They eat because they like eating.
It's not exactly a new idea. Focusing on your breathing and controlling it distracts you from whatever is stressing you out and calms you. Pipe breathing is just a slightly different way of taking deep breaths to calm and relax yourself.
The implants have been used to control certain forms of epilepsy for some time. The side effects are known, which is how the possible use for weight control was discovered.
This isn't some random shit that someone started doing, so take your idiotic fear-mongering elsewhere.
Barbaric? The morlocks will find fat man flesh quite tasty me thinks.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
For me, sadly, it is the opposite. Once I started cooking and baking, I got good at it. Then I realized "you mean I can have butter chicken and chocolate cake whenever I want?"
Mostly random stuff.
Well, I don't know who to root for.
Don't worry - the tendency to see both sides of an issue is a genuine medical affliction brought on by an over-active brain. Soon they'll have an implant to help such people reduce every issue affecting the world to a simplistic false dichotomy, taking away the uncomfortable urge to try and deal with complexity.
Meanwhile, you just need to rely on willpower to suppress your skepticism when reading stories like this.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
That's not neccesary: http://www.montignac.com/en/
Most diets are based on medical myths. What is needed is to eat better, not less. I suppose that is culturally impossible in the USA.
I've also been hearing about success in treating tinnitus by stimulation of the Vegas nerve.
I tend to come back from Vegas with tinnitus, but maybe we haven't been going to the same clubs.
Moderate exercise, like walking, some time after a meal has a good effect on blood glucose peaks. There's more to exercise than just burning the calories.
, teenagers jumping off cliffs
That is an unfortunate side effect of improving someone's condition with severe depression. I've been there, when you're so depressed you don't want to get out of bed or do anything, barely having motivation to eat. Suddenly with an SSRI, and some other alternatives in principle as it isn't just the drug, you have energy and motivation to do things. Some people use that energy and motivation to fix some of the issues and improve their environment to remove things reenforcing their depression, to get their life back in shape. Others who were previous suicidal but too depressed to actually give a damn or motivate themselves to do anything also now have motivation to do what they think they want.
That is known, but that is not the same as directly attributing the effect to the same nerve this thing stimulates, and that this device would therefore interfere or cause the opposite effect.
And here I thought obese women couldn't be more sexy.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
There is a simple solution to obesity: feel like you're starving all the time.
FTFY. I'm sure you're totally man over nature, showing the third most powerful driver of all life who's boss. (after sleep and thirst, and usually before sex)
Most overweight people who are otherwise mostly healthy can reduce their caloric intake significantly without feeling like they're "starving all the time." Have a salad for lunch instead of that pizza or burrito. Stop eating crap between meals. Drink some water before you start eating. Stop wolfing down your meals, and stop when you start feeling full.
There is a simple solution to obesity: feel like you're starving all the time.
FTFY. I'm sure you're totally man over nature, showing the third most powerful driver of all life who's boss. (after sleep and thirst, and usually before sex)
Most overweight people who are otherwise mostly healthy can reduce their caloric intake significantly without feeling like they're "starving all the time." Have a salad for lunch instead of that pizza or burrito. Stop eating crap between meals. Drink some water before you start eating. Stop wolfing down your meals, and stop when you start feeling full.
Normally my eyes roll when I see someone start to give this kind of advice, but tsqr has it right. Water is number one. Most people eat when they are dehydrated. Second, salads are the most incredible things. You can add full fat dressing and bacon (or your favorite protein) and lose weight. Soups, without noodles, are good, too. Not as much fun as pizza, but instead of buying a crappy pizza everyday, buy a great pizza once in a while. Those carbs will kill you.
Anything that can seriously help people control their weight isn't a gimmick, it's a fix
This is closer to a gimmick. And a dangerous one at that.
From TFA:
In a 12-month clinical trial considered by the FDA, 38.3% of subjects who received the active Maestro device lost at least a quarter of their excess weight, and 52.5% of subjects lost at least 20% of their excess weight. On average, weight loss in those subjects with an active device was about 8.5% greater than that seen in subjects who received a Maestro electrical pulse generator that was not activated.
...
While the cost of the device has not yet been set, Lea said that getting the device implanted and activated will likely cost "somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000"--an amount that is more than gastric banding but less some of the most complex gastric bypass surgery.
Over a year, on average, it increases the weight loss by "about 8.5%" compared to an implant which was turned off.
And, it works for about half the people.
I.e. For the people who have been losing weight through other means, 92.2% of the weight loss is attributable to FACTORS OTHER THAN THE IMPLANT.
"About 8.5%" increase is about 7.8% of the new total.
All that at the yet unknown cost of MAYBE $20-30k, invasive surgery and most importantly - randomly fucking about with one's nervous system.
They are patching-in this implant to jam that same network which we KNOW to be a major neurological pathway and of huge importance "in the bidirectional communication of the gut-brain axis and...useful therapeutic adjuncts in stress-related disorders such as anxiety and depression".
That thing severing of which causes mice to give up and surrender in stressful situations?
They are flooding that with jamming signals during the hours when one is awake.
What could possibly go wrong, right?
And to achieve what? A sense of satiety.
Because as we all know, we eat ONLY when we are hungry and we intake food by volume, regardless of the calories.
100 grams of Nutella and 100 grams of cucumbers is the same to us.
We just need to get our stomach to think it is stuffed with SOMETHING - and then we will stop gaining weight.
At least according to the logic behind this "50-50 chance for 8.5% increase in the effectiveness of dieting" gimmick which works by jamming one's nervous system.
That $30000 spent would be better invested into healthier food and exercise.
Heck... it's TWO annual federal minimum wages in the USA.
One could literally spend a year on that money doing nothing but working on their health.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Back in 2000 I started taking an OTC weight loss pill that contained Ephedrine. It completely killed my appetite. Often times at work I would only notice it was lunch time because it had gone quiet as everyone had left for lunch. Without intentionally changing my diet, with the exception of ditching soda for iced tea, I lost 85 pounds in 10 months. I still continued to eat the same foods, but didn't snack or eat other than meal time because I had no desire for food. I did not exercise at all, unless you count the walk back and forth to my car in the parking lot... Once I stopped taking those pills, I slowly put the weight back on and by the time it became an issue the FDA had banned the sale of Ephedrine based diet pills. I tried the new non-Ephedrine version of the pill and it simply didn't work - I was still hungry and wanted to snack. If they could implant something in me that gives me the same lack of appetite, I would sign up for it in a heartbeat.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
Not at all: people are lazy and uninformed about nutrition, just as they are lazy and uninformed about finances and many other things. But laziness and lack of information are not grounds for neurosurgery.
Yes, it turns out to be that simple. One simple way you can see that is obesity has gone from 10% to 50% in the US since 1960, yet people have more choices for food and exercise and are generally healthier. Therefore, obesity is a result of the choices people make, not external factors, genetics, or disease.
The point of exercise isn't to burn excess calories, it is to improve health and change your metabolism.
Yes, you can. You can also easily not overeat by 1000 calories a day. In fact, you're already doing just that because if you kept overeating by 1000 calories per day, you'd explode.
No, it's not a matter of "not eating"; a diet that is predicated on fighting "nagging hunger" is doomed to failure. Hunger isn't just "very very annoying" it's pretty much irresistible.
It is a matter of eating the right things, things that make you feel full without overeating.
That does require eating stuff you don't like and not eating stuff you do like until your tastes adjust, but it does not require you to go hungry. I know, I went through it.
Then do something about it. Your problem is either that you don't know how to eat and people aren't telling you, or that you choose to eat bad foods. Subjecting yourself to invasive surgery is not the answer.
Yours is a common opinion, one voiced especially by skinny people convinced of their own personal virtue and the vices of the obese. Oh, if only you were correct!
Unfortunately, many obese people feel hungry even consuming in excess of their caloric needs, and those that diet and hold their weight off long term often do it while feeling hungry most of the time. And hunger doesn't appear to abate (or abate much) over time, even years after weight loss. Successful weight loss for those of us with appetite disorders is often coupled with regular weigh ins and consistent caloric tracking, or with some other form of assistance. The notion that obese people just need to slow down their eating and trust their sense of satiety, or that they can do simple food substitutions is purest nonsense.
As it turns out, I have personal experience in this area. Also, I have scientific training and expertise in the field of metabolism. Do yourself a favor and learn a bit more instead of reinforcing ignorance and prejudice.
That's bullshit. Obese people have pretty much the same metabolism as skinny people. It's not your "metabolism" that makes you obese, it's how much and what you eat.
People are NOT one size fits all.
And there are HUGE variations in BMR from person to person.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
Causes of individual differences in BMR
The basal metabolic rate varies between individuals. One study of 150 adults representative of the population in Scotland reported basal metabolic rates from as low as 1027 kcal per day (4301 kJ/day) to as high as 2499 kcal/day (10455 kJ/day); with a mean BMR of 1500 kcal/day (6279 kJ/day). Statistically, the researchers calculated that 62.3% of this variation was explained by differences in fat free mass. Other factors explaining the variation included fat mass (6.7%), age (1.7%), and experimental error including within-subject difference (2%). The rest of the variation (26.7%) was unexplained. This remaining difference was not explained by sex nor by differing tissue size of highly energetic organs such as the brain.[10]
Thus there are differences in BMR even when comparing two subjects with the same lean body mass. The top 5% of people are metabolizing energy 28-32% faster than individuals with the lowest 5% BMR.[11] For instance, one study reported an extreme case where two individuals with the same lean body mass of 43 kg had BMRs of 1075 kcal/day (4.5 MJ/day) and 1790 kcal/day (7.5 MJ/day). This difference of 715 kcal/day (67%) is equivalent to one of the individuals completing a 10 kilometer run every day.[11]
On top of that, activity factor would have no effect if it were "not your "metabolism" that makes you obese, it's how much and what you eat."
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Changing nutrition and exercising costs nothing
2000 calories per day from processed cereal, from fresh fruit and vegetables and from meat costs the same?
Ready to eat burger and soda, 5 minute microwave meal and an hour-long preparation of a meal (plus cleaning up afterward) take up the same time and cost the same to prepare?
A hour of exercise each day is something which is affordable to both those making $100 an hour and those making $3 and hour, doing 3 jobs?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
"As it turns out, I have personal experience in this area. Also, I have scientific training and expertise in the field of metabolism. Do yourself a favor and learn a bit more instead of reinforcing ignorance and prejudice."
This is the internet, are you dreaming?
Sorry, that was sloppy, given that I was just lecturing someone on "metabolism". Exercise doesn't burn a lot of calories, and it doesn't change the metabolic pathways by which calories turn into fat. What it does is it helps smooth out blood glucose peaks, both by burning them immediately and by creating muscle mass that can get rid of them more quickly. It also affects hormonal signals related to satiety and fat storage in various ways. That is, the benefit from exercise is much bigger than merely the amount of calories burned.
Small question, "what is pipe breathe?" I didn't see it in Wikipedia.
There are are reasons to be concerned about this device by pointed out by other comments but you're interpretations of the percentages from the original study is flat out wrong. The "8.5%" better doesn't mean that they lost 8.5% more weight than that lost by others, but that they lost 8.5% of their excess weight on average.
It is like seeing something on sale for 80% off and something else on sale for 90% off, and someone says the second was 10% better sale. It doesn't mean that the price in the second sale is only 90% of the first, but it is half of the first.
At least according to the logic behind this "50-50 chance for 8.5% increase in the effectiveness of dieting" gimmick which works by jamming one's nervous system.
And here you are failing statistics by assuming that the average is also the median.
Interesting. There was an article last week about cold climates and BMR. Loosely put, the hypothesis is that if you're mildly cold (55-65F), you'll burn calories trying to keep the body warm, but it's not so cold that hypothermia/frostbite are a risk. We're not talking the Arctic Circle, more like San Francisco 75% of the year. Sure enough, there's also a kickstarter. Although the plural of anecdote isn't data (it'd be difficult to do a double-blind clinical trial, althrough I suppose you could compare three populations, one wearing a vest at 55F, one at 65F, one with a big bunch of weights without coolers, and a fourth control group doing nothing), we may see some testing of the hypothesis in the coming years.
Ready to eat burger and soda, 5 minute microwave meal and an hour-long preparation of a meal (plus cleaning up afterward) take up the same time and cost the same to prepare?
When I was a student, our hall had a stove shared by a dozen students, and if you wanted to be a normal schedule, that meant you had 5-10 minutes of use before someone started getting mad at you. I also owned only a single pot and and pan, so the mess couldn't get any bigger than that. A 5-10 minute dinner takes longer than a 2 minute burrito in the microwave, but not by as much as you try to make it out. And for that same ready to eat "5 minute" microwave meal, you can put fresh vegetables in a microwave or boiling pot, and rinse out the water with a 10 second clean up.
The biggest difference between a microwave meal and a quick stove top meal from raw ingredients is the former involves you blankly staring at the microwave or doing something else near by for those 5 minutes, while the latter involves putting effort into it. The time can be made comparable otherwise.
In the sequel to Jumper, the bad guys control people with an implanted device that incapacitates them by stimulating their vagus nerves to make them throw up.
Enough that it could kill them, since it doesn't have to stop, ever.
No, thank you.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
According to the CDC, only 15% of obese adults are low income, so obesity is primarily a problem of the middle class and high income earners. And are you only willing to consider addressing obesity if it works for the few percent of marginal workers we have in our economy?
Potatoes, apples, beans, and tofu actually are cheaper, and there is nothing wrong with lean meat either.
If you only spend 5 minutes preparing your meals, you are pretty much destined to become obese. You need to spend at least 1h on the main meal of the day.
Even if your arguments made any sense, they would amount to saying that because low income workers can only spend 5 minutes on food preparation and afford only foods that make them fat, we should then spend thousands of dollars per year in medical treatments to alleviate the problems resulting from their obesity. Your premises are wrong, but even if they were right, your conclusion would still be ludicrous.
The implant does not cause the lack of appetite - it simulates the feeling of being full and prevents one from feeling "hungry", where hungry is synonymous with "empty stomach".
It does not stop one from snacking NOR "treating" anxiety with food NOR absorbing calories through the stomach OR the intestines.
Without intentionally changing my diet, with the exception of ditching soda for iced tea, I lost 85 pounds in 10 months.
How much soda? Those are HUGE source of sugar.
On top of that, CO2 in sodas increases the pressure and turbo-charges the reaction of absorption of those calories.
Once I stopped taking those pills, I slowly put the weight back on
Did you start drinking soda again and what made you start going to lunch again? Hunger for food or for social interaction?
Clearly, you didn't need those calories for almost a year - while you were taking in a substance which messes with dopamine levels.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The summary is talking about people who are dying from their inability to control their appetite. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Altough real solution would be to treat sugar and fat as the dangerous, unhealthy, borderline poisonous substances they are. And at some point, we'll have to. Obesity epidemic - and all related metabological problems - are getting way out of control.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Particularly cause they are supposed to be from the same source - but they don't match.
On the first graph Canada never goes above 55% (not even in projections) - on the second one it hits 60% overweight in 2008.
Austria is around 44% in 2006 on the first graph, never going over 48%, even in projections, but it hits 48% in 2006 on the second graph.
Italy - 39% or 46% in 2008?
Australia - 54% or 62% in 2007?
Is it England or United Kingdom?
Also, that's not the only place they messed up.
Correction: September 23, 2010
An earlier version of the second graph in this post ("Percent of Adults Who Are Overweight/Obese") had reversed the labels for the rates of obesity and overweight populations. The graph has been corrected.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
What is ironic is that Gastric Electric Stimulators are used to ease the symptoms of gastroparesis, reducing nausea and allowing those patients to gain weight.
Actually, that theory doesn't seem to explain observations. I have seen research that the suicidal ideation itself can be stimulated by SSRIs, not just the motivation to act on existing suicidal ideation.
I'm always reminded of the old days when we would smack the TV to get the picture to stop rolling.
Couldn'ty that cause a gambling problem in susceptible individuals?
Yes because that works so well! At least it does in La-La land, apparently.
Actually, recent research suggests that the fat-free craze ios a contributor to the rising obesity rate. Fats stimulate satiety.
http://eiriu-eolas.org/online-...
First video, click Pipe Breathing in the video for an explanation.
As someone else who has been depressed, when the SSRI start working (& it can take 6 weeks IFF they work) you have energy and the ability to act that you didn't before.
I wasn't suicidal during my depression and that did not change. It didn't change any of the times I had to switch medications (you have to taper off and go through depression before you start the next).
I put my energies into things I wanted to do but couldn't with the depression. If I had been suicidal, maybe I would've tried.
Instead I did the things I had enjoyed before. With the depression, it wasn't possible to enjoy those things. I even questioned if I had ever enjoyed them.
http://eiriu-eolas.org/online-...
First video, click PB in the table of contents
I think he means we should restructure our health system in such a way that there is no big pharma or at least so that the size of the company offers no advantage. We need some major reforms in healthcare here in the states. With most of it being run by non-profits or at least a viable and equally competitive path being run by non-profits. This is true for all tech development.
Either way, there SHOULD be federal support for this, but only in the sense of loans from the federal reserve at the same rates and terms given to banks. This kind of development is of clear targeted benefit to our society in a far more obvious way than lining the pockets of wealthy bankers.
Let's say I'm someone who is capable of producing a drug or thinks I am. I should be able to use the local biology lab (akin to a library, either private non-profit or city sponsored) to develop it and perform the research I need. I should of course have to pay for access and when I submit a request for new equipment, whether or not to acquire that equipment should be a question posed to the existing membership along with how much it will increase dues and how long it's expected to increase them. Of course, I should always have the option of donating equipment myself. All members must be human persons (including partnerships) or non-profits (with no management salaries in top 10% income brackets). The requirement is that if developed further you must use "in system" facilities for manufacture and distribution and the lab will own the ip and all profits after costs will go to the inventor or non-profit that developed the drug but other members would be able to utilize the IP royalty free. Everyone is assigned a development log for every project and everything they do, every piece of equipment they use goes in and results are logged there. Including anything they do on their own without using lab equipment.
Trials and testing and advertising for the same. The same kind of thing. Centralize the costs but require those using the system to pay the costs. Streamline the process to parallel FDA approval and go through FDA approval using template requests and submissions. Members pay dues while using the process. The previous log is required and access is only to individuals and non-profits. Members vote on whether to proceed on studies and any study that hasn't met the minimum requirements for their study (animal trials on X subjects for Y time for instance) can't have it put to a vote unless they submit for an exemption and provide justification.
Manufacture, Advertising, sales, and distribution. This would need to be a national non-profit. Drugs would be sold with a fixed markup over a fair estimate of costs (30% is typical markup in a retailer). When patents expire drugs would continue to be made available at cost only without the markup as long as they are viable. If a capacity increase is needed or better equipment of some type, it goes to a vote of members with patents in the system. Want to pull a drug? It goes to a vote among the members of the system.
In the end, it costs what it costs and those costs are spread out among everyone developing drugs and those people get all the profits. Since all costs come from federal loans it's very easy to determine them. Divide up the total loan payment among the total number of mg/ml of drug produced and let the more expensive vs less expensive to produce drugs live with the average. It's better than all the min/maxing and duplicate charging games that result from any other way.
A large portion of obese people are so not just from feeling hungry but from the addiction. It can be as bad as any opioid.
People who must eat what they crave even when full. Vomiting if needed. Eating at any and all hours of the night. When not eating a pain grows not in the stomach but in the mind. It's maddening.
To understand addiction. Pick something you can't live without. Something you must do. Playing with your kids. Jogging. Reading a book. Hot shower. Coffee. Something you know you have to do. You can't live without it.
Now don't do it for a week. This will give you a small taste of what addiction is. Worst part of food addiction, you HAVE to eat.
No need of big, medium or small pharma. Just cut the carbs, nothing more.
For a medical reason I am now more than 6 months on "barely any carbs diet", which is extreme [no wheat, rise or barley, no sugar, very little fruit and no alcohol] and I would not recommend it for "just" weight loss but it showed me in practice what is going on here. From 94 to 76 kg [while working out like crazy to use some of the fat before it is gone] in weeks. Flat, and I do mean flat tummy. Energy level -- unbelievable! I have the feeling I will take off sometimes, it feels so light...Ha, they say that after 40 you can't have flat tummy simply because "this is life". Yhea, right!
Points of interest: giving up refined sugar was very easy. You can shove the most delicious chocolate under my nose and I won't notice. Abstinence period in the beginning was mere days. Giving up wheat was/is not so easy. Still have cravings for pancakes, apple pies and the likes. Hopefully after the issue is solved I can have some. But I learned my "carbs lesson" for life!
Eat better, exercise, and the weight will come off. Honestly, how fucking hard is that? I do this every day. The last thing people need is yet another gimmick.
I suddenly wish /. had Facebook-style likes. EXACTLY THIS.
Yes, for people who actually need them, SSRIs can provide the motivation to do things as part of lifting the depression. But the research showed that for some people (fortunately not you), especially adolescents, they can actually cause suicidal ideation that was not there before.
It's the same shotgun style approach they've been using with SSRI's all these years, the result of which has been a placebo effects, severe anxiety, anger management, even greater depression, teenagers jumping off cliffs and an occasional person whom benefits.
Wish I had Mod points!
Mods: Mod this to Infinity, and beyond!
No truer words were ever spoken. I have been preaching this for about a decade. Most people look at me like I have two heads. But you're right. They have been using SSRIs to turn knobs in the brain, but they don't even know which way to turn them, let alone how far...
Actually, that theory doesn't seem to explain observations. I have seen research that the suicidal ideation itself can be stimulated by SSRIs, not just the motivation to act on existing suicidal ideation.
Exactly. I know the plural of anecdote is not data; but how many anecdotes DOES it take before it is a good first-approximation of data?
There is a simple solution to obesity: change your diet. It's easy, risk-free, and doesn't cost anything (it actually saves you money).
Hopefully, "in 1,000 years", people will consider neurostimulation, surgery or drugs to "treat" obesity to be barbaric and uneducated.
So says the person who hasn't dieted.
There is a simple solution to obesity: feel like you're starving all the time.
FTFY. I'm sure you're totally man over nature, showing the third most powerful driver of all life who's boss. (after sleep and thirst, and usually before sex)
Exactly.
Most overweight people who are otherwise mostly healthy can reduce their caloric intake significantly without feeling like they're "starving all the time."
But they CANNOT simply reduce their caloric intake enough to BOTH lose weight AND not feeling like they are starving all the time.
In experiments, they reduced the caloric intake of obese rats to below what was considered starvation levels, and guess what, the rats' metabolic processes simply adjusted, and there was little to no weight reduction (but I'm sure if you could have asked the rats, they would have said they were "starving").
In fact, when you go into caloric deprivation, you actually consume muscle, not fat. Fat is consumed only as a last resort. This is what makes the anorexics die.
All of the species that survived the last Ice Age were the ones that were able to go for long periods without regular food intake. Caloric restriction, by itself, is abysmally poor at producing weight reduction; but is excellent at producing miserable test subjects.
They have been using SSRIs to turn knobs in the brain, but they don't even know which way to turn them, let alone how far...
Not to mention the idiotic FDA regulations which reference Body Mass Index, which is the most ridiculous way to measure fat % I've ever seen.
Just for one example, body builders often have a rather extreme BMI. But treatments for fat people are not even remotely appropriate for them.
So why is this ancient, discredited, obviously-ludicrous-on-its-face measure being used in medicine at all?
I.e. For the people who have been losing weight through other means, 92.2% of the weight loss is attributable to FACTORS OTHER THAN THE IMPLANT.
"About 8.5%" increase is about 7.8% of the new total.
This is flat out wrong. The average 8.5% weight loss is not saying loss_device / loss_control = 1.085, but is staying (loss_device as percent) - (loss_control as percentage) = 8.5%.
When you transition from "Life sucks, I don't know why and don't know what to do" state where you barely manage to get by and do even things that give short term rewards to "I have an idea why life sucks, and I'm going to do something about it," why would it be surprising that some people will pick non-constructive or even destructive actions to do? When you're depressed enough to not want to do anything, you don't sit there and say, "Gee, I would commit suicide, but I don't feel like it," and instead a lot of the suicidal thoughts come at the stage where you want to plan a course of action, and you're mind is determined to do something and take the time to think of all the details and planning.
The cure for obesity is willpower. When fat people (the majority of Americans) use willpower instead of eating, they lose weight. It's a scientific fact.
The implants have been used to control certain forms of epilepsy for some time. The side effects are known, which is how the possible use for weight control was discovered.
This isn't some random shit that someone started doing, so take your idiotic fear-mongering elsewhere.
Lap bands have been used to control weight for some time also, a great number of which went wrong and caused severe anxiety, depression and other more serious psychological issues resembling schizophrenia as well, all because of,damage to the Vagus nerve, of which the band sits in very close proximity. The problem I have is there's little understanding of cause and effect while at the same time, the negative affects are almost murderously horrible and for this reason, treatments like this should be limited to persons on whom all other measures have been exhausted and in which there is chronic impairment of life. Arguably, epilepsy, treatement resistant depression and morbid obesity may belong in this category but not the average Joe who needs to loose 50-100 pounds as this sort of treatment can nearly be equated to shock therapy or a lobotomy.
It's not surprising, in fact it was the initial theory exactly because it seems reasonable. It just doesn't pan out when examined closer. It has been researched since it was an important distinction to make.
Suicidal ideation is a lot more than considering suicide. It can be gauged by a therapist. Were the parsimonious theory correct, it would imply that those patients could be screened out to avoid the problem. Alas, it doesn't work that way.
Most overweight people who are otherwise mostly healthy can reduce their caloric intake significantly without feeling like they're "starving all the time."
But they CANNOT simply reduce their caloric intake enough to BOTH lose weight AND not feeling like they are starving all the time.
Of course they can. You don't have to cut your intake to starvation levels in order to lose weight. In order to maintain an obese weight, an average otherwise healthy individual must consume at least 500 calories per day above their normal weight maintenance consumption level. Cutting 500 calories per day from an obese maintenance diet does not result in a person feeling like they're starving all the time, and it doesn't result in the body going into muscle consumption mode. It's a large order of french fries, or a quarter of a 14" pizza, for God's sake. Of course, all this assumes that the person doesn't confuse "I'm not uncomfortably full" or "I miss eating a burrito larger than my forearm every day" with "I feel like I'm starving." What it results in is a steady weight loss on the order of 1 to 2 pounds per week, which is perfectly sustainable until the person's weight drops to the level where the lower consumption balances the calories burned, at which weight levels off.
Suicidal ideation is a lot more than considering suicide.
Actually, it is just that, depending on your source. A lot of has been written in the literature on how exactly to define it, but either comes down to considering suicide, or having intent with those thoughts, and a lot of criticism of the latter camp because intent is difficult to distinguish in situations that don't actual go beyond thoughts.
And I think you missed what was being said, that the creation of suicidal thoughts happening after starting drugs is still in agreement with the idea it is a matter of motivation. Suicidal ideation, under mutliple definitions, requires an amount of planning, commitment and effort not present in some severe cases of depression. The act of considering or committing to do something to change one's situation can generate thoughts and plans of suicide, where there were none before. This is still an active area of research, with limited research addressing depression not involving anti-depressants, but some showing similar increase in suicide as recover progresses.
Cutting 500 calories per day from an obese maintenance diet does not result in a person feeling like they're starving all the time, and it doesn't result in the body going into muscle consumption mode.
Nor will it result in weight loss! even over an extended period of time.
You think it's all a matter of energy accounting. That the body is like a balloon with a small hole in it. And that all you have to do to make the balloon smaller is to stop blowing it up as fast, right?
But it simply isn't that simple. The body really DOES have a say in the matter, and can adjust it's calorie consumption over an astonishingly wide range. So, there is a feedback mechanism at work, and unfortunately, in order to swamp-out that closed-loop,system's ability to compensate, most people who are overweight and insulin-resistant (which is pretty-much the same set), do in fact have to uncomfortably restrict their caloric intake; far beyond the "skip the large fries" level that you high-handed-ly suggest.
Suicidal ideation can also be a sort nihilism. That is, even if you have no intention of committing suicide, you either think you might be better off if you died from some external influence or you don't feel strongly motivated to prevent such a death (in that case, surely improved motivation would help).
My thoughts on avoiding playing with that nerve... ever had a vagus reaction when drawing blood?
I'd rather stay conscious, thank you.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
You must think I'm a very unusual person then, having lost over 40 pounds in 6 months, just by cutting out high-calorie foods and between-meal snacks. No muscle loss, no feeling starved. And I've maintained the loss for 8 more months without feeling deprived.
I know a few people who have obtained similar results, so I don't think I'm unique at all.
yeah, we need this for all types of small development. Maker space and labs in a library format.
Cheap storage VM.
Would not the substitution of beans, lentils and rice for bread and elimination or major reduction of Sugary softdrinks and French-Fried potatoes do the job. It would work, even if you are the TV couch potato. Baked potato without sour cream or butter would be better than the items mentioned in the first sentence.
It may lead to people thinking of suicide, also. If you're very depressed, you may well be resigned to how things are going. SSRI treatment can help you get less depressed, and this is good. Then, you hit something and feel like you're going back to the old depression. It's really easy to get determined not to go back into the old blackness, and decide to avoid it by any means possible. There's really only one way to assure that you're not going to get horribly depressed again.
This is based on experience. I found a reason not to try to kill myself, but it was really tempting.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
You may be an exception, in which case I congratulate you. On the other hand, it's barely over a year since you started your diet, and the rate of success over a five-year period is dismally low.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Thanks. From what I have read, the majority of weight-maintenance failures occur because the individuals didn't find a diet that was satisfying in the long term. Breaking habits is very difficult. I guess I'm fortunate in that I seem to have settled into a healthy eating pattern that I find satisfying. It's been quite a while since I had to make a conscious effort to choose the right foods (as in thinking, "Well, I'd really rather have this, but I guess I'd better have that instead." As for the long run, time will tell.
The vagus nerve does a lot of really cool things which don't get a lot of appreciation.
Cats purr to self-stimulate it. That's what they're doing when they make that noise. And you can do it also. It orders the mind, creating calm and clarity. When you're affronted with terror or high emotion, "pipe breathe" and within half a minute, you're in the zone, able to think and react with calm precision to high-stress situations. And that's just *one* thing.
So yeah, let's allow big pharma to cyberman our core nervous apparatus for something as incredibly stupid as a weight loss gimmick.
Yeah of course in a critical scenario enhancing the flight response over the fight response is always going to have a good outcome.
Whilst you're purring yourself to calmness people who use both responses often make the right choice.
This concept some people have that adrenaline is only used by muscle bound idjits is somewhat amusing. At least evolutionary forces have an answer to the idjit response.
Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
The problem is that in our society, we are bathed in countless stress-causing events which were not around during the millions of evolutionary years we spent not having to deal with 8 to 5 cubicle work, tax time, propaganda and traffic congestion when you're late. -Stressors which cannot be effectively dealt with by Fight or Flight responses.
It's useful to have some tools at our disposal when dealing with these (very) new day-to-day pressures.
what are the others?
The problem is that in our society, we are bathed in countless stress-causing events which were not around during the millions of evolutionary years we spent not having to deal with 8 to 5 cubicle work, tax time, propaganda and traffic congestion when you're late. -Stressors which cannot be effectively dealt with by Fight or Flight responses.
It's useful to have some tools at our disposal when dealing with these (very) new day-to-day pressures.
Fair point as long as they aren't the whole of your arsenal. I read some creative wanker who claimed he never used adrenaline when creating cause it clouded the mind. Dimwit.
Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
I agree. I use adrenaline all the time. It's called, "Coffee".
Adrenaline is also super useful when avoiding wolves and trucks and chasing soccer balls. And anger, so long as one recognizes the various flavors it comes in, is a very useful way of determining what direction to move in.
That's an interesting idea, but I don't think it would work. Clinical trials keep getting more and more expensive, as the public and FDA become less and less tolerant of risk. I don't think taxpayer money should be invested in large Phase III trials (which can cost almost $1 billion) when they have a pretty low chance of succeeding. Moreover, you really do need teams of people to be competitive in today's research world - I work in a lab in academia, and there's no way you could do much drug development all by yourself.
Manufacturing is another huge concern. You absolutely shouldn't be allowed to make something that's going to go into people in a lab like you described; GMP facilities are really expensive to run and require a lot of training to use properly (and not screw up everything else that's going on there).
I'm also not sure what you have against profits in general. For-profit companies aren't inherently bad, and non-profits aren't inherently good.
Potatoes, apples, beans, and tofu actually are cheaper,
For one person maybe. Buying in bulk to afford to feed a FAMILY, no. The beans are cheaper, but enough fruits and vegetables to make a well balanced diet is not. And good luck getting kids to eat beans all day.
Even if your arguments made any sense, they would amount to saying that because low income workers can only spend 5 minutes on food preparation and afford only foods that make them fat, we should then spend thousands of dollars per year in medical treatments to alleviate the problems resulting from their obesity. Your premises are wrong, but even if they were right, your conclusion would still be ludicrous.
If a device that fixes the problem is cheaper than the problems, it is worth it.
I see: small amounts of vegetables and fruits are cheap, but they get expensive in bulk? Are you insane or something?
In different words: American kids are getting so fat because parents are lazy and stuff them full of fast food (which is, incidentally, cheap only because its components are so highly subsidized). And to fix that problem, you suggest that socialized medicine spend vast amounts of money to mutilate people's bodies (and incidentally provide tons of income to the medical and pharma industries).
So you are saying is that we should implant vagus nerve stimulators because it's cheaper than proper nutrition? That is morally reprehensible and utterly disgusting even if it were true.
You are a sick human being.
"I don't think taxpayer money should be invested in large Phase III trials (which can cost almost $1 billion) when they have a pretty low chance of succeeding. Moreover, you really do need teams of people to be competitive in today's research world - I work in a lab in academia, and there's no way you could do much drug development all by yourself."
Which is why Pharma companies are all bankrupt? No part of what I proposed involved taxpayer money or prevented working in teams. What I proposed are loans from the federal reserve on the same terms they are given to banks. The fed does not loan out tax payer money to banks, it loans out shiny newly created money at ridiculously low rates. We have an inflationary fiat currency and it actually depends on us putting new currency into circulation. Traditionally the finance industry gets all the benefits from this system. Advanced technology and especially medicine is certainly at least one obvious alternative place we could inject this money which benefits everyone in the nation.
"You absolutely shouldn't be allowed to make something that's going to go into people in a lab like you described"
I didn't actually describe a lab. Maybe you are mentally projecting your own assumption of some sort of inferior facility? Last I checked there is nothing magical about the pharma corps that makes them more capable than anyone else.
"I'm also not sure what you have against profits in general. For-profit companies aren't inherently bad, and non-profits aren't inherently good."
In general I agree. I just don't think healthcare and medicine is an appropriate for-profit industry. The costs are the same whether for-profit or non-profit. Profit has to come from somewhere and in the case of healthcare the result is higher costs which means less people benefit from the care. A for profit has an interest in maximizing profit and you maximize profit by providing as little as possible for as much as possible. This isn't in the interest of our nation. We all benefit if the health industries provide as much as possible at the lowest cost possible.
I don't propose blocking the for profit drug industry. I propose they shouldn't be allowed to use infrastructure that exists to provide an alternative to them and tie up those resources just to increase their own profits. Non-profits and partnerships still allow for teams to group together in a more established structure and work and allow for those people to profit from that work in the form of salaries in the case of a non-profit and in the system I proposed all the net profit derived from the fruits of their labor.