Skip Navigation
consider the implications for a post scarcity future
  • fair enough, makes sense, I was trying to think outside the box of "storing" the power as pumped hydro or batteries...but I guess where they exist, these industries still welcome the negative prices when they happen :)

  • consider the implications for a post scarcity future
  • There is never surplus power with a network of a few "turn it on as needed" intensive industrial uses like haber-bosch reactors for ammonia, dessalination plants and electrolysis for aluminium or other metals...right?

  • Google Decides To Pull Up The Ladder On The Open Internet, Pushes For Unconstitutional Regulatory Proposals
  • At this point what they learn in business schools is the full bestiary of legal and illegal tricks and scams you can use to extract money from us cattle and contribute as little as possible to the upkeep :(

  • What was a profound moment that a video game caused you to experience, and why?
  • Haha, was it the endless cliff next to the gun island? Been there lmao

  • Removed
    what youtube is doing is a slow easing of removing adblockers rather than an immediate one
  • ::: title

    ::: No luck yet, what's the syntax?

  • What was a profound moment that a video game caused you to experience, and why?
  • Subnautica...when I was so immersed that I went too deep...didn't have enough time to return to the surface to breathe...and then looked up in anguish and saw that dreaded refraction "circle" hundreds of meters above you... THE DEEP HAS YOU, THERE IS NO ESCAPE

  • Are there any green alternatives to asphalt in development?
  • It's about return on energy. Fossil fuels return 20x what you invest it's essentially free energy.

    (edit: roughly, this translates to how many people are free to do things with the work of one, if every person lives alone, it's 1, if each person has a personal slave/robot, it's around 2, we want to stay well above 2. Modern society has 19 people doing all sorts of non-survival things for each one farming and collecting resources because fossil is so "cheap")

    Renewables can reach 5-10 at best, which is not so bad (medieval was around 1.3, pre-industrial with slavery was around 1.8), so you can do it, but it will have to reshape society, which will be fine, if we know what we're doing or can at least imagine what we are aiming for to avoid disappointment. It's hard to be utopian going backwards.

    This whole debate started with carbon footprints and carbon pricong, because I believe that creating a market can help the less virtuous among us to use their greed to help solve the problem of public consent in a consumerist society without devolving into a dictatorship.

    But yea, let's aim for that energy return of say... 7 and try to imagine what such a society would look like. A return to slower shipping by sail again...more solar boilers for all hot water...solar desalination...peak-solar hydrogen for fertilizers and airplanes...more compact cities with mass transit and bikes, lots of working from home, more fixing things DIY...a return from cities to the countryside and decentralisation would help, but only if those communities were more self-sustained and local, with 2x more power to farming, mining and wind/solar communities (meaning potentially smaller countries)...now I could describe all the potential setbacks of all of those points, but I won't, because this is solarpunk and we need more imagining of what things are going to be like when we succeed...not so much the year 500 :)

  • Why not both?
  • It's not shying from it, many just don't see a way forward that doesn't involve a significant risk of massive suffering like starvation, war, authoritarianism if one or two things don't go exactly as the utopians would expect (like most revolutions).

    This is not a utopian project, this is a "controlled landing" of a large spaceship from a 200-year old addiction to fossil-fueled growth: you need everyone on board and an awareness of the risks by everyone and possibility of relapses, calm and a notion of what is at stake, but there is still a chance that we'll fuck up, given our history :/

  • Are there any green alternatives to asphalt in development?
  • No, they mean the Haber process that requires energy-intensive (can mass-solar do it?) hydrogen to convert nitrogen back into ammonia.

  • Why not both?
  • It may work if fossil consumers like China, Japan, parts of Africa and South America, India and Europe work together to sustainably penalize and eventually get off fossil fuel dependence, but the fossil fuel exporter cartel will fight this :/

  • Why not both?
  • But corporations don't have any incentive to do anything that hurts the profits they extract from the 99% (mostly indexed to energy prices, everyone is selling energy directly or indirectly) and politicians at best just do what people vote for (better standard of living, which mostly depends on cheaper energy prices).

  • Why not both?
  • I think we're only gonna get out of this feedback loop if something drastic happens to knock most of the world's oil exports (war, some miracle UN tax on pumping oil out of the ground) or if prices start to adequately reflect carbon prices i.e. a CO2-standard that reflects the way fuels drive society and how you can't simply hide the price of your lifestyle through subsidies or diluting the future cost of pumping free energy out of the ground on everyone else.

    Societies can't do it on their own without an individual blanket incentive (for all social classes) to save on CO2 emission (i.e. something like a currency). Or I guess there is maybe straight-out climate fascism, there is also that solution to this tragedy of commons, but I'd like to try to avoid that.

  • What is a popular book that everyone buys but nobody reads?
  • Heya fellow raccoon, raccoon Bible is much better than the one compiled by Roman bishops in 325AD in Nicea e.g. "let there be trash for all" and "give to racoons what belongs to the raccoons" :D

  • Why not both?
  • Yes, but corporations make things for the 99%. Or maybe you mean things outside mainstream society, like private jets, all sorts of military manufacture and upkeep and space vanity projects...I have a hard time understanding what it is that corporations are responsible for that their customers are not responsible for as well.

  • Why not both?
  • It's not a drop in the bucket. Not driving, not flying has a major impact, but sure if 1% of people hoard 50% of the ability to emit CO2 and other scarce resources, that's something else that needs to be fixed, but carbon pricing in terms of a footprint or an actual number under every price tag makes sense nevertheless.

  • My struggle from a UNIX background in the modern "cloud" world
  • Makes sense I didn't get the job, I only vaguely know the difference and it was mostly theoretical stuff like CI/CD, but those recruiters really wanted to throw me at random interviews to see if I'd stick :D

    PS: sorry I offtopic'ed to recruiter-hating, gonna go find a community for that.

  • Why not both?
  • You mean conspicuous consumption or things like "being the loser who doesn't own a car, but actually walks to work and saves tons in gas"

  • Why not both?
  • Who do companies sell shit to? Where do they get their profits from? Why do they even exist?

  • Desalination system could produce freshwater that is cheaper than tap water
    news.mit.edu Desalination system could produce freshwater that is cheaper than tap water

    A new solar desalination system takes in saltwater and heats it with natural sunlight. The system flushes out accumulated salt, so replacement parts aren’t needed often, meaning the system could potentially produce drinking water that is cheaper than tap water.

    Desalination system could produce freshwater that is cheaper than tap water

    > Engineers at MIT and in China are aiming to turn seawater into drinking water with a completely passive device that is inspired by the ocean, and powered by the sun.

    > In a paper appearing today in the journal Joule, the team outlines the design for a new solar desalination system that takes in saltwater and heats it with natural sunlight.

    > The researchers estimate that if the system is scaled up to the size of a small suitcase, it could produce about 4 to 6 liters of drinking water per hour and last several years before requiring replacement parts. At this scale and performance, the system could produce drinking water at a rate and price that is cheaper than tap water.

    https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(23)00360-4

    161
    Nagorno-Karabakh: death toll rises as latest violence condemned by Russia and US
    www.theguardian.com Nagorno-Karabakh: death toll rises as latest violence condemned by Russia and US

    Local human rights officials say at least 27 people, including two civilians, have been killed after Azerbaijan attacked Armenian-controlled areas

    Nagorno-Karabakh: death toll rises as latest violence condemned by Russia and US
    1
    China’s BRI now faces a credible Indian challenger
    m.timesofindia.com China’s BRI now faces a credible Indian challenger | India News - Times of India

    India News: India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, announced at G20, gives New Delhi new purchase in West Asia. But a lot will depend on delivery, and India’

    China’s BRI now faces a credible Indian challenger | India News - Times of India

    India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, announced at G20, gives New Delhi new purchase in West Asia. But a lot will depend on delivery, and India’s economic performance

    The spectacular G20 summit in New Delhi could be termed as India’s coming out party. Not dissimilar to the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, which was widely seen as China’s grand message of “arrival”. Curiously, in many aspects of national power, China 2008 and India 2023 have several analogues – not least in aggregate GDP measures, where China 2007 and India 2022 are at very similar levels! Perhaps not entirely coincidentally, the biggest brass-tacks outcome of G20 was the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEE-EC). A multi-modal connectivity initiative to link India with Europe via ports and rail corridors built in the Middle East (ME). It will, in theory, provide an alternative to the current trade connectivity through the Suez Canal. In conception and design, it looks to be an alternative to China’s ambitious BRI. An Indian

    BRI

    (Boats and Rail Initiative) to challenge China’s BRI? Sounds compelling beyond the wordplay, especially as China’s BRI runs into rough weather, including in the Indian subcontinent, primarily on financial sustainability issues.

    23
    How does moderation decide what to remove? What do you do if you see a perfectly reasonable comment in the modlog?

    I was going through the modlog today and found that this comment posted to lemmy.ml was simply removed for being "reactionary".

    > Removed Comment What reform of France's educational establishment would satisfy you? Should they move their weekends to Mondays and Tuesdays in order to avoid accidentally aligning with any religious practice's day of rest? This is a ridiculous standard to hold any societal institution to. Because France's dominant culture has been Christian for many years, its secular institutions of course have echoes of Christian practice within them - but this is not proof that they are Christian institutions. Education is good. Education should be given to every single person in society, and every person in it should have a right to receive a full secular education regardless of their parents' opinion on the matter. And during the course of that education, class, ethnic, and religious differences between children should be minimized in order to socialize children into being tolerant, metropolitan citizens. reason: reactionary

    That sounds like a perfectly respectable position to have, even if it may be a little controversial, but it is more constructive than divisive. I really like lemmy's transparency in showing what was removed and why, but for the first time I'm seeing what looks like a summary removal of an urbane comment.

    Am I the only one who is worried by that? Am I missing something here?

    By the way, I'm not interested in debating the subject, there is plenty of debate in the original post, what I want to know is how any of you would frame this as decisively reactionary enough to throw out of a healthy debate when comparing with the flood of shitposting we see every day that doesn't get struck down.

    15
    Europe's carmakers fret over China's EV prowess at Munich car show
    www.reuters.com Europe's carmakers fret over China's EV prowess at Munich car show

    Europe's carmakers have a fight on their hands to produce lower-cost electric vehicles (EVs) and erase China's lead in developing cheaper, more consumer-friendly models, executives said at Munich's IAA mobility show.

    Europe's carmakers fret over China's EV prowess at Munich car show

    Main points (to make up for the clickbaity title):

    Challenge to bring down European EV manufacturing costs

    Lower costs to close price gap with China EVs

    China EV sales account for 8% of European total through July

    Renault's R5 EV to be 25%-30% cheaper than Scenic/Megane

    MUNICH, Sept 4 (Reuters) - Europe's carmakers have a fight on their hands to produce lower-cost electric vehicles (EVs) and erase China's lead in developing cheaper, more consumer-friendly models, executives said at Munich's IAA mobility show.

    "We have to close the gap on costs with some Chinese players that started on EVs a generation earlier," Renault (RENA.PA) CEO Luca de Meo told Reuters at the car show, adding when manufacturing costs decline, prices will also go down.

    ...continues

    26
    We Know Where New Weight Loss Drugs Came From, but Not Why They Work
    www.nytimes.com We Know Where New Weight Loss Drugs Came From, but Not Why They Work

    The empty auditoriums, Gila monsters, resistant pharmaceutical executives and enigmas that led to Ozempic and other drugs that may change how society thinks about obesity.

    We Know Where New Weight Loss Drugs Came From, but Not Why They Work

    We Know Where New Weight Loss Drugs Came From, but Not Why They Work

    The empty auditoriums, Gila monsters, resistant pharmaceutical executives and enigmas that led to Ozempic and other drugs that may change how society thinks about obesity.

    Credit...Ryan David Brown for The New York Times

    Gina Kolata

    For more than 25 years, Gina Kolata has been reporting on obesity research that until recently had found that drugs and changes in diet or exercise produced little lasting effect on weight.

    Aug. 17, 2023Updated 9:47 a.m. ET

    Every so often a drug comes along that has the potential to change the world. Medical specialists say the latest to offer that possibility are the new drugs that treat obesity — Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and more that may soon be coming onto the market.

    It’s early, but nothing like these drugs has existed before.

    “Game changers,” said Jonathan Engel, a historian of medicine and health care policy at Baruch College in New York.

    Obesity affects nearly 42 percent of American adults, and yet, Dr. Engel said, “we have been powerless.” Research into potential medical treatments for the condition led to failures. Drug companies lost interest, with many executives thinking — like most doctors and members of the public — that obesity was a moral failing and not a chronic disease.

    While other drugs discovered in recent decades for diseases like cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s were found through a logical process that led to clear targets for drug designers, the path that led to the obesity drugs was not like that. In fact, much about the drugs remains shrouded in mystery. Researchers discovered by accident that exposing the brain to a natural hormone at levels never seen in nature elicited weight loss. They really don’t know why.

    “Everyone would like to say there must be some logical explanation or order in this that would allow predictions about what will work,” said Dr. David D’Alessio, chief of endocrinology at Duke, who consults for Eli Lilly among others. “So far there is not.”

    Although the drugs seem safe, obesity medicine specialists call for caution because — like drugs for high cholesterol levels or high blood pressure — the obesity drugs must be taken indefinitely or patients will regain the weight they lost.

    Dr. Susan Yanovski, a co-director of the office of obesity research at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, warned that patients would have to be monitored for rare but serious side effects, especially as scientists still don’t know why the drugs work.

    But, she added, obesity itself is associated with a long list of grave medical problems, including diabetes, liver disease, heart disease, cancers, sleep apnea and joint pain.

    “You have to keep in mind the serious diseases and increased mortality that people with obesity suffer from,” she said.

    The drugs can cause transient nausea and diarrhea in some. But their main effect is what matters. Patients say they lose constant cravings for food. They find themselves satisfied with much smaller portions. They lose weight because they naturally eat less — not because they burn more calories.

    And results from a clinical trial reported last week indicate that Wegovy can do more than help people lose weight — it also can protect against cardiac complications, like heart attacks and strokes.

    But why that happens remains poorly understood.

    “Companies don’t like the term trial and error,” said Dr. Daniel Drucker, who studies diabetes and obesity at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute in Toronto and who consults for Novo Nordisk and other companies. “They like to say, ‘We were extremely clever in the way we designed the molecule,” Dr. Drucker said.

    But, he said, “They did get lucky.” A Lonely Origin Story

    Image Dr. Joel Habener stands in a lab in a white coat holding a glass slide. Dr. Joel Habener in 2007.Credit...Ruby Arguilla-Tull/Bloomberg News

    In the 1970s, obesity treatments were the last thing on Dr. Joel Habener’s mind. He was an academic endocrinologist starting his own lab at Harvard Medical School and looking for a challenging, but doable, research project.

    He chose diabetes. The disease is caused by high blood sugar levels and is typically treated with injections of insulin, a hormone secreted by the pancreas that helps cells store sugar. But an insulin injection makes blood sugar plummet, even if levels are already low. Patients have to carefully plan injections because very low blood sugar levels can result in confusion, shakiness and even a loss of consciousness.

    Two other hormones also play a role in regulating blood sugar — somatostatin and glucagon — and little was known then about how they are produced. Dr. Habener decided to study the genes that direct cells to make glucagon.

    That led him to a real surprise. In the early 1980s, he discovered a hormone, GLP-1, that exquisitely regulates blood sugar. It acts only on insulin-producing cells of the pancreas, and only when blood sugar rises too high.

    It was perfect, in theory, as a targeted treatment to replace sledgehammer-like insulin injections.

    Another researcher, Dr. Jens Juul Holst at the University of Copenhagen, independently stumbled on the same discovery.

    But there was a problem: When GLP-1 was injected, it vanished before reaching the pancreas. It needed to last longer.

    Dr. Drucker, who led the GLP-1 discovery efforts on Dr. Habener’s team, labored for years on the challenge. It was, he said, “a pretty lonely field.”

    When he applied to the Endocrine Society to give talks, he found himself scheduled at the very end of the last day of the annual meetings.

    “Everyone had left for the airport — people were taking down the exhibits,” he said.

    From the late 1980s to the early 1990s, he spoke to nearly empty auditoriums. Dr. Eng’s Monster

    Image Credit...Peter DaSilva for The New York Times

    Success came from a chance discovery that was not appreciated at the time.

    In 1990, John Eng, a researcher at the Veterans Affairs medical center in the Bronx, was looking for interesting new hormones in nature that might be useful for medications in people.

    He was drawn to the venomous Gila monster when he learned that it somehow kept its blood sugar levels stable when it did not have much to eat, according to a report from the National Institutes of Health, which funded his work. So Dr. Eng decided to search for chemicals in the lizards’ saliva. He found a variant of GLP-1 that lasted longer.

    Dr. Eng told The New York Times in 2002 that the V.A. had declined to patent the hormone. So Dr. Eng patented it himself and licensed it to Amylin Pharmaceuticals, which began testing it as a diabetes drug. The drug, exenatide or Byetta, went on sale in the United States in 2005.

    But Byetta had to be injected twice a day, a real disincentive to its use. Drug company chemists sought even longer-lasting versions of GLP-1.

    At Novo Nordisk, chemists began by using a well-known trick. They loosely attached GLP-1 to a blood protein that kept it stable enough to remain in circulation for at least 24 hours. But when GLP-1 slips off the protein, enzymes in the blood quickly degrade it. So chemists had to alter the hormone’s building blocks — a chain of amino acids — to find a more durable variant.

    After tedious trial and error, Novo Nordisk produced liraglutide, a GLP-1 drug that lasted long enough for daily injections. They named it Victoza, and the F.D.A. approved it as a treatment for diabetes in 2010.

    It had an unexpected side effect: slight weight loss. A Dismal History

    Image Dr. Jeffrey Friedman, who discovered the hormone that tells the brain how much fat is on the body, in 1995.Credit...Remi Benali/Gamma-Rapho, via Getty Images

    Obesity had become a dead end in the pharmaceutical industry. No drug that was tried worked very well, and every one that led to even modest weight loss had serious side effects.

    For a flickering moment in the late 1990s, there was hope when Dr. Jeffrey Friedman at Rockefeller University in New York found a hormone that told the brain how much fat was on the body. Lab mice genetically modified to have none of the hormone ate voraciously and grew enormously fat. Researchers could fine-tune an animal’s weight by altering how much of the hormone it got.

    Dr. Friedman named the hormone leptin. Amgen bought the rights to leptin and, in 1996, began testing it in people. They did not lose weight.

    Dr. Matthias Tschöp at Helmholtz Munich in Germany tells of the frustration. He left academia three decades ago to work at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis, excited by leptin and determined to use science to find a drug for weight loss.

    “I was so inspired,” Dr. Tschöp said.

    When leptin failed, he tried a different gut hormone, ghrelin, whose effects were the opposite of leptin’s. The more ghrelin an animal had, the more it would eat. Perhaps a drug that blocked ghrelin would make people lose weight.

    “Again, it wasn’t that simple,” said Dr. Tschöp, who left Lilly in 2002.

    The body has so many redundant circuits of interacting nerve impulses and hormones to control weight that tweaking one simply did not make a difference.

    And there was another obstacle, noted Dr. Tschöp’s former colleague at Lilly, Dr. Richard Di Marchi, who also was an executive at Novo Nordisk.

    “There was very little interest in the industry in doing this,” said Dr. Di Marchi, now at Indiana University. “Obesity was not thought to be a disease. It was looked at as a behavioral problem.”

    Image Dr. Friedman studied mice that had been genetically modified to have none of a hormone that told their brains how much fat was on their bodies. Researchers could fine-tune an animal’s weight by altering its hormones, but the study failed in humans.Credit...Remi Benali/Gamma-Rapho, via Getty Images Starving Rats

    Novo Nordisk, which today has 45.7 percent of the global insulin market, thought of itself as a diabetes company. Period.

    But one company scientist, Lotte Bjerre Knudsen, could not stop thinking about tantalizing results from studies with liraglutide, the GLP-1 drug that lasted long enough to be injected just once a day.

    In the early 1990s, Novo researchers, studying rats implanted with tumors of pancreas cells that produced copious amounts of glucagon and GLP-1, noticed that the animals had nearly stopped eating.

    “These rats, they starved themselves,” Dr. Knudsen said in a video series released by the Novo Nordisk Foundation. “So we kind of knew there was something in some of these peptides that was really important for appetite regulation.”

    Other studies by academic researchers found that rats lost their appetites if GLP-1 was injected into their brains. Human subjects who got an intravenous drip of GLP-1 ate 12 percent less at a lunch buffet than those who got a placebo.

    So why not study liraglutide as both a diabetes drug and an obesity drug, Dr. Knudsen asked.

    She faced resistance in part because some company executives were convinced that obesity resulted from a lack of willpower. One of the champions of investigating GLP-1 for weight loss, Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen, the current chief executive of the Novo Nordisk Foundation and former chief scientific officer of the company, said in the video posted by the foundation that he “had to spend half a year convincing my C.E.O. that obesity is not just a lifestyle condition.”

    Dr. Knudsen also noted that the company’s business division had struggled with the idea of promoting liraglutide for two distinct purposes.

    “It’s either diabetes, or it’s a weight loss,” she recalled in the foundation video series.

    Finally, after liraglutide was approved in 2010 for diabetes, Dr. Knudsen’s proposal to study the drug for weight loss moved forward. After clinical trials, the F.D.A. approved it as Saxenda for obesity in 2014. The dose was about twice the diabetes dose. Patients lost about 5 percent of their weight, a modest amount.

    But Dr. Martin Holst Lange, executive vice president of development at Novo Nordisk, said in a telephone interview that it was at least as good as other weight-loss drugs, and without side effects like heart attacks, strokes and death.

    “We were super excited,” he said. Beyond Diabetes

    Image A Novo Nordisk site outside Copenhagen.Credit...Scanpix Denmark/Reuters

    Despite the progress on weight loss, Novo Nordisk continued to focus on diabetes, trying to find ways to make a longer-lasting GLP-1 so patients would not have to inject themselves every day.

    The result was a different GLP-1 drug, semaglutide, that lasted long enough that patients had to inject themselves only once a week. It was approved in 2017 and is now marketed as Ozempic.

    It also caused weight loss — 15 percent, which is three times the loss with Saxenda, the once-a-day drug, although there was no obvious reason for that. Suddenly, the company had what looked like a revolutionary treatment for obesity.

    But Novo Nordisk could not market Ozempic for weight loss without F.D.A. approval for that specific use.

    In 2018, a year after Ozempic’s approval for diabetes, the company started a clinical trial. In 2021, Novo Nordisk got approval from the F.D.A. to market the same drug for obesity with a weekly injection at a higher maximum dose. It named the drug Wegovy.

    But even before Wegovy was approved, people had begun taking Ozempic for obesity. Novo Nordisk, in its Ozempic commercials, mentioned that many taking it lost weight.

    Hinting turned out to be more than enough. Soon, said Dr. Jeffrey Mechanick, an endocrinologist at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine, patients latched onto Ozempic. Doctors prescribed it off label for those who did not have diabetes.

    “There was a little bit of gaming going on,” Dr. Mechanick said, with some doctors coding patients as having pre-diabetes to help them get insurance coverage.

    By 2021, fed by social media, a general frenzy for weight loss and aggressive marketing by Novo Nordisk, the news that Ozempic made people lose weight had reached a tipping point, said Dr. Caroline Apovian, a co-director of the Center for Weight Management and Wellness at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a consultant for Novo Nordisk and other companies. Ozempic was on everyone’s lips, even though Wegovy was the drug approved that year for obesity.

    But Wegovy caught up.

    In July, doctors in the U.S. wrote about 94,000 prescriptions a week for Wegovy compared with about 62,000 a week for Ozempic. Wegovy is in such demand, though, that the company is unable to make enough, its spokeswoman Ambre James-Brown said. So for now, while it ramps up production, the company sells the drug only in Norway, Denmark, Germany and the United States. And at pharmacies in those countries, shortages are frequent.

    And Dr. Apovian, like many other obesity medicine specialists, is now booked with patients a year in advance.

    Image Credit...Cydni Elledge for The New York Times More Medicines, More Mysteries

    The reason Ozempic and Wegovy are so much more effective than Saxenda remains a mystery. Why should a once-a-week injection produce much more weight loss than a once-a-day injection?

    The drugs, said Randy Seeley, an obesity researcher at the University of Michigan, are not correcting for a lack of GLP-1 in the body — people with obesity make plenty of GLP-1. Instead, the drugs are exposing the brain to hormone levels never seen in nature. Patients taking Wegovy are getting five times the amount of GLP-1 that they would produce in response to a Thanksgiving dinner, Dr. Seeley said.

    And, he added, in the brain, “the drugs go to unusual places.” They are not just going to areas thought to control overeating.

    “If you were designing a drug, you would say that’s a bad idea,” said Dr. Seeley, who has consulted for Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, among others. Drug designers try for precision — a drug should go only to the cells where it is needed.

    GLP-1, because of its chemical structure, should not even get into some areas of the brain where it slips in.

    “Nobody understands that,” Dr. Seeley said.

    Wegovy, though, is just the start.

    Lilly’s diabetes drug, tirzepatide or Mounjaro, is expected to get F.D.A. approval for obesity this year. It hooks GLP-1 to another gut hormone, GIP.

    GIP, on its own, produces, at best, a modest weight loss. But the two-hormone combination can allow people to lose a median of about 20 percent of their weight.

    “No one fully understands why,” Dr. Drucker said.

    Lilly has another drug, retatrutide, that, while still in early stages of testing, seems to elicit a median 24 percent weight loss.

    Amgen’s experimental drug, AMG 133, could be even better, but is even more of a puzzle. It hooks GLP-1 to a molecule that blocks GIP.

    There is no logical explanation for why seemingly opposite approaches would work.

    Researchers continue to marvel at these biochemical mysteries. But doctors and patients have their own takeaway: The drugs work. People lose weight. The constant chatter in their brains about food and eating is gone.

    And, while the stigma of obesity and the cultural stereotype that obese people aren’t trying hard enough to lose weight endures, some experts are optimistic. Now, they say, patients no longer have to blame themselves or feel like failures when they can’t lose weight.

    “The era of ‘just go out and diet and exercise’ is now gone,’” said Dr. Rudolph Leibel, a professor of diabetes research at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. “Now clinicians have tools to address obesity.”

    A correction was made on

    Aug. 17, 2023

    :

    An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a drug approved for diabetes in 2010. It was Victoza, not Saxenda. It also misattributed a quote from a video about persuading a chief executive that obesity was not just a lifestyle condition. It was said by Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen, not Lars Rebien Sorensen.

    43
    Researchers identify oldest known species of swimming jellyfish
    phys.org Researchers identify oldest known species of swimming jellyfish

    The Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) announces the oldest swimming jellyfish in the fossil record with the newly named Burgessomedusa phasmiformis. These findings are announced in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

    Researchers identify oldest known species of swimming jellyfish

    Incredible how these animals are so tenuous and can still leave a fossil record

    0
    Debunking the Tech Hype Cycle with Dan Olson

    This interview is 2 months old, but I haven't seen it discussed so far and given the news about reddit's new cryptobeaniebabies, here it goes. This is a critique of the tech hype cycle, LLMs, VR, the metaverse failure, NFTs and cryptocurrencies with a refreshing historical awareness of past attempts that failed, like second life and VR games. Adam Conover's interviewee is Dan Olson https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7v5qq/meet-the-guy-who-went-viral-on-youtube-for-explaining-how-nfts-crypto-are-a-poverty-trap

    17
    Gsus4 Gsus4 @feddit.nl
    Posts 13
    Comments 443