I asked about anorexia risk with GLP1s 3 years ago at a medical conference, and I was shamed for asking, because we "only give these medications for people who are severely overweight, nobody is doing this to become anorexia". I was not allowed a follow-up question.
With regards to one specific scientific point in this interview, Meghan is wrong that the idea is to use GLP-1 agonists in the short term and then stop them once the weight is lost. Actually, research has shown that (surprise surprise), when the medications are stopped, the weight comes back (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40186344/).
Practice in this area is of course evolving, but the general view is that these are long-term maintenance medications. For people with diabetes and obesity that is; the Hollywood types are not getting evidence-based medical care.
There does just seem to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what is attractive. One thing I found influential was this Discover magazine from back in the day (https://www.discovermagazine.com/do-you-love-this-face-5596) which showcased an extremely attractive face and went on to explain that it wasn't actually a real person, it was a composite that averaged out the facial features of some large number of women.
""Human beauty really has three components," says Johnston. "In order of importance, there's natural selection, which leads to the average face and a limited age range. Then there's sexual selection," which leads men, at least, to be attracted to exaggerated feminine traits like the small lower jaw and the fuller lips. "Finally, there's learning. It's a fine-tuning mechanism that allows you to become even more adapted to your environment and culture. It's why one person can say 'She's beautiful' and another can say, 'She's not quite right for me.' ""
So Sydney Sweeney has both some exaggerated feminine traits, but also in many ways looks ordinary ("mid" as the kids say). The thing is, those are both winners. Men like an average twenty-something that has one notable feature that attracts the eyes.
She has also given interviews saying she doesn't do cosmetic procedures, but also saying that she is purposefully maximizing her window of maximum sex appeal with the roles she takes and the nudity she does. It's all refreshingly honest.
I think the Louise Perry argument is more that humans developed in food-scarce environments and we have evolved to be strongly attracted fats and sugars. Hence we don’t have capacities for dealing with massive quantities of sugary fatty food (eg Fig Newtons or dinner at Applebees). Given that 70 percent of Americans are now overweight and that this has largely happened since WWII I think the theory is credible.
Great interview! and Meghan, I have been meaning to mention that your hair looks amazing....colour and style. And I take it there are no extensions or wig lol
Oh, thank you! My hair is so unruly that it has crossed my mind to wear a wig for podcasting. Apparently, wigs are MUCH more common than we realize. But I appreciate the compliment on a good hair day.
Self denial is being signaled with anorexia. it's similar gender specific status seeking to the stupid physical risk taking in adolescent males. Men evolved to kill each other, and human females evolved to not starve to death and prevent their kids from starving to death.
Kind of interesting that both the stars of that dull and dreadful movie The Substance--Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley--have both undergone Substance-like injections or procedures, presumably driven by impulses that the movie tried to satirize and make horrifying. (Anyway there's plastic surgery scuttlebutt on Qualley, who's only around 30, but I haven't done an exhaustive before-and-after study. Maybe if I've got some free time this weekend, who knows.)
I asked about anorexia risk with GLP1s 3 years ago at a medical conference, and I was shamed for asking, because we "only give these medications for people who are severely overweight, nobody is doing this to become anorexia". I was not allowed a follow-up question.
With regards to one specific scientific point in this interview, Meghan is wrong that the idea is to use GLP-1 agonists in the short term and then stop them once the weight is lost. Actually, research has shown that (surprise surprise), when the medications are stopped, the weight comes back (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40186344/).
Practice in this area is of course evolving, but the general view is that these are long-term maintenance medications. For people with diabetes and obesity that is; the Hollywood types are not getting evidence-based medical care.
There does just seem to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what is attractive. One thing I found influential was this Discover magazine from back in the day (https://www.discovermagazine.com/do-you-love-this-face-5596) which showcased an extremely attractive face and went on to explain that it wasn't actually a real person, it was a composite that averaged out the facial features of some large number of women.
""Human beauty really has three components," says Johnston. "In order of importance, there's natural selection, which leads to the average face and a limited age range. Then there's sexual selection," which leads men, at least, to be attracted to exaggerated feminine traits like the small lower jaw and the fuller lips. "Finally, there's learning. It's a fine-tuning mechanism that allows you to become even more adapted to your environment and culture. It's why one person can say 'She's beautiful' and another can say, 'She's not quite right for me.' ""
So Sydney Sweeney has both some exaggerated feminine traits, but also in many ways looks ordinary ("mid" as the kids say). The thing is, those are both winners. Men like an average twenty-something that has one notable feature that attracts the eyes.
She has also given interviews saying she doesn't do cosmetic procedures, but also saying that she is purposefully maximizing her window of maximum sex appeal with the roles she takes and the nudity she does. It's all refreshingly honest.
I think the Louise Perry argument is more that humans developed in food-scarce environments and we have evolved to be strongly attracted fats and sugars. Hence we don’t have capacities for dealing with massive quantities of sugary fatty food (eg Fig Newtons or dinner at Applebees). Given that 70 percent of Americans are now overweight and that this has largely happened since WWII I think the theory is credible.
Great interview! and Meghan, I have been meaning to mention that your hair looks amazing....colour and style. And I take it there are no extensions or wig lol
Oh, thank you! My hair is so unruly that it has crossed my mind to wear a wig for podcasting. Apparently, wigs are MUCH more common than we realize. But I appreciate the compliment on a good hair day.
Self denial is being signaled with anorexia. it's similar gender specific status seeking to the stupid physical risk taking in adolescent males. Men evolved to kill each other, and human females evolved to not starve to death and prevent their kids from starving to death.
Blame it on the male gays!
I saw a puppy around 38:00!!
the other male gays - literal LOL
oh damn! I missed the April fools episode...
If you’re on a GLP-1 you just don’t have much of an appetite. So a celeb on such a drug just doesn’t feel that hungry.
I interviewed Kidman at the premier of The Others in 2001 and couldn’t believe how thin her arms were. She’s still that skinny.
Kind of interesting that both the stars of that dull and dreadful movie The Substance--Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley--have both undergone Substance-like injections or procedures, presumably driven by impulses that the movie tried to satirize and make horrifying. (Anyway there's plastic surgery scuttlebutt on Qualley, who's only around 30, but I haven't done an exhaustive before-and-after study. Maybe if I've got some free time this weekend, who knows.)