Er... can anyone with a better[*] knowledge of human biology/metabolism explain this to me? (It's a "diet patch", presumably after the manner of nicotine patches.)
The principle is that there are certain chemicals the body releases when it's 'full' and it might be possible to mimic them so that people feel full and so their appetite drops before it normally would.
I believe there are supposed to be some very obese people who completely lack a certain compound (which other people have and might affect appetite) and that's probably what they're pumping small amounts of into you... [icky grammar apology]
Of course, the gap between 'it might exist' and 'absorbing a bit through the skin will work wonders' is huge, but not legally distant, and anyway might be filled with a placebo effect...
The quest for a diet pill takes huges amounts of funding, I guess this kind of 'might work' spin off is an attempt to recoup a little...
Well, if it has any scientific basis (which I sincerely doubt), it would be by enabling some mixture of chemicals that tricked your body into thinking you had eaten in some way.
To actually lose weight you need to take in fewer calories than you expend in a day, and do this repeatedly over time. I was rummaging my way through medical research papers on this topic on the web yesterday, and the consensus figure I came up with for losing 1 kg of weight was 7,700 calories below the 'maintenence' level for any individual (this varies with each persons own weight, metabolic rate and level of regular exercise). Now imagine you are reducing your food intake to be 500 calories a day below what you need to stay level (generally this is considered the 'safe' level for long term weight loss). Thats 15.4 days per kilo.
Do I think a bit of plaster stuck on my arm can achieve the same effect, well, not unless I can also see a squadron of Tamworths putting on an air display outside my window right now.
Do I think a bit of plaster stuck on my arm can achieve the same effect
Well, they're claiming a pound a day, which is <thinks> a kilo in 2.2 days. So that must be eating <thinks> 3,500 calories under you normal daily consumption.
Er... I'd draw a conclusion here if I had any clue what a normal daily calorie intake was.
Gloucester Old Spots doing barrel rolls. Now there's an image :)
Well, the 'average' calorie intake for a female office worker who takes a half hour walk at lunch time, occassionally walks around her worklace to talk to colleagues and drives to & from work was given as 1600-2000 calories per day. Go figure :)
Oooh look - they've attached smoke cannisters to their trotters and are currently looping the loop.
I'm not going to rant either, just snigger at the very small font used for 'your results may vary' next to the picture !
I do agree with one of their recommendations, though - turn round 30-45 degrees relative to the camera, straighten your back, get a new sminsuit and sort your hair out and you might well look a bit better !
Hmm. It looks like the poster that the Monty Python boys did for Llap-Goch (the Welsh martial art).
I suspect that the product has something to do with leptin, which is a hormone that regulates fat storage and appetite. Some curious statements such as 'in clinical tests, 93% effective'. Would have been nice to get some sort of link to the 'tests', but then for that, it really would have to be effective.... It looks like some chemical that makes you feel full all the time. So you never have hunger-based cravings. Maybe it does work, but only as long as you use it $$$$$$.
The explanations others have given are plausible, but so far as I'm aware have not been tested thoroughly. I strongly suspect the science behind it is very similar in nature to that behind crystal healing amulets, herbal Viagra, and snake oil - viz., for a unifying explanation you need to look at the human sciences rather than the natural sciences.
This is a pompous way of saying I think it's rubbish. *grin*
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:31 am (UTC)I believe there are supposed to be some very obese people who completely lack a certain compound (which other people have and might affect appetite) and that's probably what they're pumping small amounts of into you... [icky grammar apology]
Of course, the gap between 'it might exist' and 'absorbing a bit through the skin will work wonders' is huge, but not legally distant, and anyway might be filled with a placebo effect...
The quest for a diet pill takes huges amounts of funding, I guess this kind of 'might work' spin off is an attempt to recoup a little...
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 04:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:36 am (UTC)To actually lose weight you need to take in fewer calories than you expend in a day, and do this repeatedly over time. I was rummaging my way through medical research papers on this topic on the web yesterday, and the consensus figure I came up with for losing 1 kg of weight was 7,700 calories below the 'maintenence' level for any individual (this varies with each persons own weight, metabolic rate and level of regular exercise). Now imagine you are reducing your food intake to be 500 calories a day below what you need to stay level (generally this is considered the 'safe' level for long term weight loss). Thats 15.4 days per kilo.
Do I think a bit of plaster stuck on my arm can achieve the same effect, well, not unless I can also see a squadron of Tamworths putting on an air display outside my window right now.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:50 am (UTC)Well, they're claiming a pound a day, which is <thinks> a kilo in 2.2 days. So that must be eating <thinks> 3,500 calories under you normal daily consumption.
Er... I'd draw a conclusion here if I had any clue what a normal daily calorie intake was.
Gloucester Old Spots doing barrel rolls. Now there's an image :)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:54 am (UTC)Oooh look - they've attached smoke cannisters to their trotters and are currently looping the loop.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:45 am (UTC)Probably saved me the effort of a rant anyway.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 03:50 am (UTC)no subject
I do agree with one of their recommendations, though - turn round 30-45 degrees relative to the camera, straighten your back, get a new sminsuit and sort your hair out and you might well look a bit better !
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 04:11 am (UTC)I suspect that the product has something to do with leptin, which is a hormone that regulates fat storage and appetite. Some curious statements such as 'in clinical tests, 93% effective'. Would have been nice to get some sort of link to the 'tests', but then for that, it really would have to be effective.... It looks like some chemical that makes you feel full all the time. So you never have hunger-based cravings. Maybe it does work, but only as long as you use it $$$$$$.
Results !
They're referring there to the success rate of the patch remaining stuck to the test subject for the full 24 hours each day.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 04:28 am (UTC)This is a pompous way of saying I think it's rubbish. *grin*
Disclaimers
Date: 2004-01-21 05:46 am (UTC)Re: Disclaimers
Date: 2004-01-21 07:31 am (UTC)Isn't that... oh, never mind.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-21 12:35 pm (UTC)It's an advert, with lots of capitals and emboldening, draw your own conclusions.
And why you of all people are even looking!
The scary bit is the voiceover, I damn near fell off my chair when the laptop started talking to me.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-22 03:07 am (UTC)I was looking out of morbid scientific curiosity, after yahoogroups inflicted a popup on me. I wasn't shopping for diet products ;)