Doing your own research (1 Viewer)

[fatness]

Just want everybody to know, if you are allergic to ozempic you should not take ozempic.

Aren't those warnings the stupidest things? Also "If you are allergic to the ingredients in this medication do not take this medication", after which the commercial proceeds to not list the ingredients.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Just want everybody to know, if you are allergic to ozempic you should not take ozempic.

Aren't those warnings the stupidest things? Also "If you are allergic to the ingredients in this medication do not take this medication", after which the commercial proceeds to not list the ingredients.

Yep, same goes for the disclaimers in the electronic medical record.

I always assumed that stuff serves no purpose, but for the lawyers out there, do disclaimers on prescribed medications provide any legal protection, and to whom?

 

[Sparky Polastri]

https://www.pbs.org/show/shot-in-the-arm/

 

[Idiot Boxer]

Just want everybody to know, if you are allergic to ozempic you should not take ozempic.

Aren't those warnings the stupidest things? Also "If you are allergic to the ingredients in this medication do not take this medication", after which the commercial proceeds to not list the ingredients.

Yep, same goes for the disclaimers in the electronic medical record.

I always assumed that stuff serves no purpose, but for the lawyers out there, do disclaimers on prescribed medications provide any legal protection, and to whom?

I've not done any research on this, but usually ridiculous warnings such as these don't materialize out of thin air, they're the result of a bad ruling or something that raises the eyebrows of the lawyers. Somewhere out there, someone has sued a doctor and/or drug company because they took a drug they were allergic to and, (it would seem predictably) had a negative outcome and blamed the doctor/drug company for not warning them to not take something they're allergic to.

You would think its common sense, but as they say. Common sense isn't common.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Just want everybody to know, if you are allergic to ozempic you should not take ozempic.

Aren't those warnings the stupidest things? Also "If you are allergic to the ingredients in this medication do not take this medication", after which the commercial proceeds to not list the ingredients.

Yep, same goes for the disclaimers in the electronic medical record.

I always assumed that stuff serves no purpose, but for the lawyers out there, do disclaimers on prescribed medications provide any legal protection, and to whom?

I've not done any research on this, but usually ridiculous warnings such as these don't materialize out of thin air, they're the result of a bad ruling or something that raises the eyebrows of the lawyers. Somewhere out there, someone has sued a doctor and/or drug company because they took a drug they were allergic to and, (it would seem predictably) had a negative outcome and blamed the doctor/drug company for not warning them to not take something they're allergic to.

You would think its common sense, but as they say. Common sense isn't common.

I’m sure. Still, seems like pretty flimsy legal protection, as every prescription you receive has instructions with major warnings, and potentially the package insert, which includes a more extensive list.

And every commercial advises you to “talk to your doctor” anyway.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

 

[Mister CIA]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

Doctor Mike seems pretty solid. He has a fantastic social media game and a very large following on youtube (14 million) and he seems to be fighting the same good fight as Term.

I've mostly cut bait on ones you mentioned, especially with their podcast format. Way too much jargon which reduces me to the role of prospector, discarding 98% of the conversation as I try to extract nuggets of information. It's exhausting.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

Doctor Mike seems pretty solid. He has a fantastic social media game and a very large following on youtube (14 million) and he seems to be fighting the same good fight as Term.

I've mostly cut bait on ones you mentioned, especially with their podcast format. Way too much jargon which reduces me to the role of prospector, discarding 98% of the conversation as I try to extract nuggets of information. It's exhausting.

Haven't heard of Dr Mike, but will check him out.

I'm not sure about Attia, but Rhonda Patrick has a website that goes deeper into a lot of her podcasts and cites studies to highlight the important points. I don't care for hour plus podcasts either, but find the breakdowns interesting.

 

[Max Power]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

I stumbled on to Peter Attia when I was researching some longevity advice for my ailing father. His focus on functional strength and stability was very useful to us. I bought my dad a couple 24lb kettlebells and we did farmers walks a couple times a day. Added in some body weight squats and some real improvement was made in the short term. My dad saw some physical improvements and that lead to a more optimistic outlook. Ultimately the cancer became too much.

I have no idea what Attia's positions are on everything. The nature of social media personality probably lends itself to overextending on medical advice, but to me that isn't a reason to discount everything a person puts out there and call them a grifter or suggest everything they say is baseless.

 

[Mister CIA]

To be clear, there is Doctor Mike, and then there is Dr. Mike.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

 

[Max Power]

To be clear, there is Doctor Mike, and then there is Dr. Mike.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

lol, I've listened to Israetel before and knew immediately they had to be talking about a different Dr. Mike.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

I stumbled on to Peter Attia when I was researching some longevity advice for my ailing father. His focus on functional strength and stability was very useful to us. I bought my dad a couple 24lb kettlebells and we did farmers walks a couple times a day. Added in some body weight squats and some real improvement was made in the short term. My dad saw some physical improvements and that lead to a more optimistic outlook. Ultimately the cancer became too much.

I have no idea what Attia's positions are on everything. The nature of social media personality probably lends itself to overextending on medical advice, but to me that isn't a reason to discount everything a person puts out there and call them a grifter or suggest everything they say is baseless.

I agree. I've found both Peter Attia and Rhonda Patrick to be the best of the "internet gurus" as far as quality of information, citations, and guests they speak to. Ofcourse they have sponsors that can seem to conflict with some of what they say, but i don't think it's a deal breaker for me if they want to sell AG1 or venison jerky before a podcast if the information provided is otherwise reasonable.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

All those guys provide valuable information, and it’s entirely possible they’re ahead of the curve in some instances.

I just don’t like when their advice becomes gospel for those who haven’t bothered to scrutinize the literature, nor when they sidestep viewpoints which conflict/show limitations to their approach.

Lastly, I don’t think I’ve heard any of them talk about the dangers of over testing, or unnecessary supplements.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

Full disclosure: I also looked into Lp(a) and apoB after reading Attia’s book. But I reviewed European and US standards for stratifying vascular risk first.

As it turns out, Euro guidelines suggest measuring Lp(a) and apoB once as an adult. This differs from US guidance, which offer no recommendation when to check them, if ever, although they acknowledge both are “risk enhancing factors” to personalize cardiovascular risk.*

There’s probably a good reason for this, as current treatment options for elevated Lp(a) are limited (though this is changing). ApoB is harder to dismiss, as there is data it provides a better gestalt of artery-clogging dyslipidemia than LDL (“bad cholesterol”) alone. Moreover, elevated apoB, even in concert with “normal” LDL, has implications for more aggressive lifestyle and medical management of vascular risk.

That said, neither test changed anything for me, and I’ll argue doctors should be recommending consistent exercise and heart-healthy diet regardless. If my apoB were through the roof, I guess I’d consider more testing (coronary calcium score and/or CT angiography), along with starting medication, as I’m already doing all the behavior stuff.

What percentage of those “doing their own research” would take the extra steps I did before testing, and does it matter?

*US guidelines are being updated, and should be released soon. I suspect they’ll make more firm recommendations on these tests, and others.

ETA I’ll guess neither would change your management either @The Longtime Lurker, as you’d opt for a trial (indefinite?) lifestyle modification regardless of the results.

 

[Terminalxylem]

To be clear, there is Doctor Mike, and then there is Dr. Mike.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

Hadn’t heard of him, but he seems reasonable.

I watched this interview with Eric Topol, which reviews longevity research, its limitations, and problems with some of the podcast “gurus” who’ve become de facto authorities on the subject.

 

[The Longtime Lurker]

Huberman convo was interesting. How about people like Rhonda Patrick and Peter Attia? Is there anyone on the socials worth taking serious or is it all pseudoscience and baseless claims? I've taken information from both of the latter and found it ahead of curve compared to my doctor in some cases, ApoB and LP(a) testing for example. I was able to ask questions about that testing and get it earlier than i would have otherwise.

Full disclosure: I also looked into Lp(a) and apoB after reading Attia’s book. But I reviewed European and US standards for stratifying vascular risk first.

As it turns out, Euro guidelines suggest measuring Lp(a) and apoB once as an adult. This differs from US guidance, which offer no recommendation when to check them, if ever, although they acknowledge both are “risk enhancing factors” to personalize cardiovascular risk.*

There’s probably a good reason for this, as current treatment options for elevated Lp(a) are limited (though this is changing). ApoB is harder to dismiss, as there is data it provides a better gestalt of artery-clogging dyslipidemia than LDL (“bad cholesterol”) alone. Moreover, elevated apoB, even in concert with “normal” LDL, has implications for more aggressive lifestyle and medical management of vascular risk.

That said, neither test changed anything for me, and I’ll argue doctors should be recommending consistent exercise and heart-healthy diet regardless. If my apoB were through the roof, I guess I’d consider more testing (coronary calcium score and/or CT angiography), along with starting medication, as I’m already doing all the behavior stuff.

What percentage of those “doing their own research” would take the extra steps I did before testing, and does it matter?

*US guidelines are being updated, and should be released soon. I suspect they’ll make more firm recommendations on these tests, and others.

ETA I’ll guess neither would change your management either @The Longtime Lurker, as you’d opt for a trial (indefinite?) lifestyle modification regardless of the results.

What percentage do extra research beyond what they're told on a podcast and does it matter is a good question.

I like to think of these "gurus" more like food for thought. They present ideas that are often worth taking a closer look and that means not just taking their word for it, but looking at the studies cited, guidelines in other populations, asking your own doctor. I don't think i would take advice beyond diet, exercise, and some easy safe (imo) modification recommendations without trying to get a more complete picture. Zone 2 vs HIIT, Mediterranean vs high protein i don't feel is much of a risk. Methylene blue vs BPC157 and I'm not going to just start taking something without my doctor signing off.

I'm health conscious and always have been, so i find their conversations and ideas interesting. Sometimes what they discuss is helpful. Huberman's attention to sleep hygiene is helpful. I'm not taking any sleep supplements he recommends, but i think circadian rhythm is super important and often overlooked. Attia we discussed with cholesterol testing. Patrick covers a lot of research related to dementia and as someone with an increased risk (family history. Apoe4 heterozygous) even though I'm not doing anything other than the usual prevention/delay recommendations my doctor suggested i still like to see new/evolving research.

It does take a critical eye to know what's theoretical and what's practical, but if you can do that they offer interesting content and discussion. I'm sure i fall for some of the woo, but i don't think all of it is bad or dangerous (sauna, morning sun, cold plunge, creatine dosage, timed eating) at the same time good habits can be reinforced as they'll push basics aswell (hydration, exercise, quality sleep, controlling cholesterol, diet)

Those tests didn't change anything for you and they didn't change anything for me either (as a side note i had to pay out of pocket for both as insurance wouldn't cover either nor would it have covered the subsequent CAC if apoB was high. I think that's changed in the case of apoB). Like you I'm checking off the basics and so far that's been enough, but they could be important for someone else. I guess for me I'm comfortable listening/reading content from gurus because i find their discussions interesting and informative, but at the same time I'm not rushing out to eat 200g of protein, start up methylene blue, or challenge my doctor beyond asking about something i might find interesting, or wanting to try lifestyle first.

I still think you're reading me wrong though. I want food, movement, and lifestyle to be my medicine whenever possible and outside of a totally unexpected health issue I've been lucky that it's been enough. If in the future that's no longer the case I'm open to medical/pharmaceutical intervention, but currently i don't want that to be my first or only option. At some point I'm sure I'll face the fact that lifestyle isn't enough and that's ok, but as of today my health is good with the basics.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I want food, movement, and lifestyle to be my medicine whenever possible

This should be the default position your doctor takes for most chronic disease management. The problem is, there are many, many false claims supported by “research” that fall under the lifestyle umbrella, including almost the entirety of the nutraceutical industry. On top of that, we now have a bunch of unsubstantiated testing and technology being advocated by internet experts, as alternatives to conventional medical care.

So medication becomes a last ditch effort, after time has passed and the underlying disease may have progressed. I’ve seen this repeatedly with cancer patients, for example, though you could argue our collective approach to weight management is another area lifestyle modification isn’t working. And it gets even messier with public health interventions, where individual benefit usually isn’t immediately apparent.

So how do you decide when enough is enough, and acquiesce to the meds?

Also, I’d be curious what you, Joe, or anyone else thinks about the interview I linked above, in contrast to podcasts like Huberman’s? It’s about longevity science, though it touches on issues posed by individuals doing their own “research”.