0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
quote:Originally posted by JodyHi Kelly - Just wanted to let you know that the promised diet drug your doctor is talking about is probably Acomplia. (I saw a headline on the "scandle sheets" saying that everyone in Hollywood is using some new miracle drug - I imagine this is it, and they're getting it from the UK - not an option for the rest of us, unfortunately. []) Everything I have heard about Acomplia is fantastic except for these few things:1. It probably won't be released in the US until sometime in 2007. The FDA is dragging its feet about the approval, but they won't say why. My guess it has to do with "worries" from the health industry that...2. It will be used by people with "only" 20+ pounds to lose. This, they claim, is not what it was "designed for." They say it was intended for people who are morbidly obese but, the fact is, it was originally designed to help people quit smoking. It didn't work very well for smoking, but it works GREAT for diet.BESIDES WHICH (here I go on my soapbox again) if the stuff works, why can't we ALL have it? Why does weight loss and maintenance have to be a continual BATTLE?! Why do we have to be at death's door before a doctor will recognize that this is a DISEASE, not just laziness?!! Is it some sort of PUNISHMENT for being fat?! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!! I just get SOOOOOO ANGRY!! [!][!][!]
quote:Acomplia may be dangerous for women of reproductive ageAnandamide is a lipid signal molecule that was the first endogenous agonist for cannabinoid receptors to be discovered. Cannabinoid receptor type 1 ( CB1 ) is widely distributed in neurons and nonneuronal cells in brain and peripheral organs including sperm, eggs, and preimplantation embryos.A study by Wang and colleagues, published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation, has demonstrated that a critical balance between anandamide synthesis by NAPE-PLD enzyme and its degradation by FAAH enzyme in mouse embryos and oviducts creates locally an appropriate "anandamide tone" required for normal embryo development, oviductal transport, implantation, and pregnancy.Adverse effects of elevated levels of anandamide on these processes resulting from FAAH inactivation are mimicked by administration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( THC; the major psychoactive constituent of marijuana ), due to enhanced signaling via CB1.Attempts to understand the mechanisms responsible for the psychoactive properties of THC in marijuana led to the discovery of cannabinoid receptors and their endogenous ligands, the endocannabinoids.Two subtypes of cannabinoid receptors have been identified to date, the CB1 receptor and the CB2 receptor.Anandamide signaling via cannabinoid receptors is not restricted to the central nervous system.It is known that CB1 and CB2 are widely distributed in nonneuronal somatic cells of peripheral organs including those of the reproductive system. This may account for the effects of marijuana and THC on multiple aspects of reproductive physiology.Aberrant functioning of anandamide signaling systems in embryos and oviducts in women may lead to ectopic pregnancy in the oviduct and/or impaired fertility.Similar adverse effects may be associated with abuse of marijuana by women of reproductive age.Reduced peripheral FAAH activity is associated with spontaneous abortion in women.As the first endocannabinoid to be discovered, anandamide has attracted the most attention from investigators. Similarly, the biological functions of CB1 have been studied much more extensively than those mediated by CB2, because CB1 receptors in the brain are directly involved in the psychoactive effects of THC.Anandamide signaling presents many potential targets for the development of novel therapeutic drugs. Unfortunately, cannabinergic ligands affect almost every physiological system investigated. Thus, drugs acting on anandamide signaling may produce a wide variety of side effects that would limit their utility. For example, possible medicinal uses of THC are limited by its psychoactive properties. One strategy for drug development targets specific cannabinoid receptors. The CB1 antagonist Rimonabant ( Acomplia ) suppresses appetite. The EMEA ( European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products ) recently has approved the use of Acomplia as a weight-loss drug.An alternate approach targets removal and degradation of anandamide. Basal levels of anandamide in the brain and peripheral organs are quite low. It is rapidly released and degraded locally. Thus, drugs that prevent anandamide reuptake and hydrolysis might be useful clinically.However, these drugs should be “carefully evaluated to judge their effects on women of reproductive age and those that are pregnant”, says Herbert Schuel, at the University at Buffalo.
quote:Originally posted by another_someoneJoy, Jody - apologies to you both (what's a 'd' between friends [:I]).George
quote:Originally posted by JodyEvery overweight person is familiar with the common attitude (even among many doctors) that they are simply lazy and can't/won’t control themselves.
quote:I agree that labeling any drug a "Miracle Cure" sets expectations unrealistically and dangerously high. The term should be avoided, and I don't believe I have ever used it. At least, I hope not...
quote:I understand that the "Powers That Be" (sorry, I don't know the names of the appropriate medical societies) have officially designated obesity as a "chronic disease." [xx(] I assume they are using the term in the same way that alcoholism is labeled a disease.
quote: Sometimes I think alcoholics have the easier road, because, although extremely difficult, they have the choice to completely avoid the thing that damages their body. We "food-aholics" don't have that choice. I wonder how many recovering alcoholics could stay sober if they were forced to take one drink a day. Just one TEENY, little drink and no more. My guess is, almost none of them could do it. And yet, that is the position "food-aholics" are in. Sorry, I'm rambling...
quote:A final thought: I have a very dear friend who has fraternal twin girls, around 4 years old. One is what people used to lovingly call a “Little Fatty.” The other is a normal-weight. These children live in the same house, eat the same, play the same, and yet one is thin and one is fat. Something, call it “disease,” call it “predisposition”, call it what you like, SOMETHING is going on in the fat child’s body that is DIFFERENT. I, personally, would appreciate it if society would recognize that difference, and if the medical community would take it seriously.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:Originally posted by JodyEvery overweight person is familiar with the common attitude (even among many doctors) that they are simply lazy and can't/won’t control themselves.Not sure this is anything new – just look at Victorian caricatures.Ofcourse, there were times in history when it was quite fashionable to be of a size we would consider to be 'obese'.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:I agree that labeling any drug a "Miracle Cure" sets expectations unrealistically and dangerously high. The term should be avoided, and I don't believe I have ever used it. At least, I hope not...I wont harp on this, merely explaining why I thought as I did – you quoted the press as referring to it as a 'miracle drug', which you then commented upon with 'I imagine this is it ' - but I imagine that was an off the cuff remark that you had not thought would be taken as literally as I did.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:I understand that the "Powers That Be" (sorry, I don't know the names of the appropriate medical societies) have officially designated obesity as a "chronic disease." [xx(] I assume they are using the term in the same way that alcoholism is labeled a disease.In the past, homosexuality was also labelled as a disease. Such labelling is something I am very wary of.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote: Sometimes I think alcoholics have the easier road, because, although extremely difficult, they have the choice to completely avoid the thing that damages their body. We "food-aholics" don't have that choice. I wonder how many recovering alcoholics could stay sober if they were forced to take one drink a day. Just one TEENY, little drink and no more. My guess is, almost none of them could do it. And yet, that is the position "food-aholics" are in. Sorry, I'm rambling...I don't regard myself as a food-aholic (excepting in the sense that if I were totally deprived of food I may have severe withdrawal symptoms leading to death). Yes, I am a chocoholic, but that is a different matter.
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:A final thought: I have a very dear friend who has fraternal twin girls, around 4 years old. One is what people used to lovingly call a “Little Fatty.” The other is a normal-weight. These children live in the same house, eat the same, play the same, and yet one is thin and one is fat. Something, call it “disease,” call it “predisposition”, call it what you like, SOMETHING is going on in the fat child’s body that is DIFFERENT. I, personally, would appreciate it if society would recognize that difference, and if the medical community would take it seriously.Precisely the point – two people, having the same lifestyles, can still have different weights.I myself have varied in weight quite a bit, peeking at around 280lbs, then dropping to around 230lbs, and now back up to around 250lbs (as a child and teenager I was quite slim).My own feeling is often that it is as much about my own emotional disposition, and the impact it has on my metabolic rate, than it is about food consumption.I also think that sometimes my problem is not that I eat too much, but I eat too infrequently (being lazy, and only cooking for myself, I cook one large meal a day, rather than many smaller ones).
quote:Originally posted by JodyAnd yet you said you consider smoking to be a disease...