Total shot in the dark,

I had this problem for a while. It turns out the whole time my firefox was set to a different dialect of english (British) lol. I think it may have been set that way by default because of Ubuntu being headquartered in the UK lol

My spellcheck seems to be working fine these days though, could you list some examples of common words that you’ve had to add to the dictionary? I can check how mine responds when I get home

Interesting argument, but I have already hand drawn you as the soyjack and me as the chad

if the device is designed and tested well (which admittedly, only like 10% of devices are)

Pretty condescending post only for you to “admit” that the overwhelming supermajority of products on the market are badly designed. And then to agree with me that the information they extrapolate is “crap”, too.

Did you know that virtually all runners are using tech from that 90% crap category? That’s also who my post aimed at. You know, the people currently being scammed by these marketing companies, not people with the specific medical grade equipment you personally designed.

Thank you, nonetheless, for the interesting info and further reading. Hopefully it will help steer people towards good equipment if they do decide they want to track these metrics as accurately as possible

Seriously, this. The things are genuinely useless. They can’t even measure your heart rate correctly (seriously look it up. They use algorithms to “estimate” your heart rate. Different brands give different results. People wear elaborate chest strap setups to try and get an accurate value and even then it’s subject to a huge margin of error).

Get a $10 dumbwatch with a stopwatch function. Run or cycle a familiar route once in a while to track your progress. Find different ways to challenge yourself. Do some runs all out. Hill sprints. Do some longer runs a bit slower than you would think, so that even if your breathing is a little heavier you could still hold a conversation with someone while maintaining that pace.

Ignore all the senselessly overcomplicated 5 stage heartrate zone V02max aerobic astrology bull that these companies advertise to you as a big benefit of their product. Having a 3d map of your route is not going to make you a better runner. Having a virtual leaderboard where 99% of people you compete against are using a wonky cellphone gps that teleports them 1000ft off course isn’t going to make you a better runner

Sounds like the Fire Emblem games would be perfect for this!

I have not been following the situation very closely so I would confirm this with someone else, but I believe the actual letter has not been made public. A few images have been floating around that are “artist’s interpretations”, and occasionally these have been presented as Trump’s actual drawing in various forums.

Again, could be off, been a busy week this is just what I gathered from skimming comments

Awful AI slop

To be honest, reading thru the study and poking at some of the discussions about it online, it seems to not be remotely saying what people are saying it’s saying lol.

Like they weren’t able to find many of the results they expected in actual human samples compared to the mice. They also found that slower weight loss seemed to correspond with fewer and less severe epigenetic changes.

That second point there was never really expanded on beyond a throwaway statement, but it jumped out at me because the humans studied received bariatric surgery. Which causes massive weight loss very quickly. They even cited that as a potential confounding variable.

It’s also not really about “fat cells multiplying” at all, but rather how a collection of dozens of different factors differ between never obese and formerly obese samples, and only at the two year mark after a weight loss intervention.

Their own conclusion is that “they have not proven” their findings have anything to do with weight regain. This is then bizarrely and immediately followed by what can only be described as an unprompted advertisement for Ozempic, along with speculative musing that further study is needed to determine if it could be used to “erase or diminish” the epigenetic memory (despite semaglutide being unrelated to the experiments and appearing nowhere else in the paper?). Interestingly enough, there’s also an extant conflict of interest statement linking one of the researches to several pharmaceutical companies, including Novo Nordisk

All in all, it strikes me as nothing more than yet another case of bad science reporting. With people kind of going in with preconceived notions, glossing over all of the details, and emerging with snippets taken out of context (body remembers being fat! It changes your genetics!). Lo and behold all the online discussion centers around just the provocative headline and the speculative sections of the paper.

It seems like the researches even deliberately tried to use language to bait this type of response from the general public (although this is now just speculation on my part). In summary, I am unpersuaded by the available evidence. Thank you however for linking it! There is a lot of other interesting info in there

Righteous, thank you! I’m in the muck right now at work but I’ll give it a read when I can

Thank you, no rush! If so could you please reply in a new comment so I get a notification?

Could you direct me to the paper where it was proven? There seems to be a notable amount of bad journalism and broad misrepresentation of the science on this topic.

We are basically discussing whether or not obesity is an inescapable condemnation, so we should not sensationalize the topic whatsoever, and we should especially not present it as a fact if it is not a fact

I’m down 100lbs and been chilling there for a a while actually. (I do bulk/cut cycles of around 30lbs for bodybuilding so my total weight loss fluctuates from like 120lbs to 90lbs depending on how that’s going. Just for disclosure)

But I’ve heard a few people mention this idea that “fat cells stick around forever” and “send hunger signals to fill you back up”. Do we have a scientific source for this?

My other thing with it is like, that’s not the reason someone gets fat the first time right? Because the idea is your fat cells start multiplying after a certain weight? So regardless it still seems important to address that first cause and not repeat it

But for me personally I just haven’t really experienced it at all lol. I’ve found that actually the type of food I eat makes me hungry and more likely to go off track. Like any fast food, most prepackaged snacks and prepared meals from the grocery store.

Like I could eat an 800cal pint of ice cream then have dinner 45 minutes later. But 200 calories of frozen grapes and I’m like, stuffed lol. Or I’ve also noticed if I have a doughnut in the morning (work offers them) I’m hungry all day, but eggs cheese oats and yogurt leave me satisfied to the point where I’m not hungry at all when I get home, and eat just because I know I need the nutrition from dinner.

Anyway sorry for rambling, really I’m just curious to get to the bottom of the “depleted fat cell” thing. I had never heard of it the entire time I was losing weight/maintaining then all of the sudden I’m hearing it pop up in lots of places, even lemmy now