Can Ozempic help lower your risk of dementia?
There are several risk factors for dementia, including type 2 diabetes. A new study reports that semaglutide — the active ingredient in type 2 diabetes and weight loss GLP-1 medications Ozempic and Wegovy — may help lower dementia risk in people with type 2 diabetes. Researchers say semaglutide targets several dementia risk factors, in addition to being anti-inflammatory, which could explain this benefit.According to Alzheimer's Disease International, as of 2020, there were over 55 million people living with dementia, with that number expected to rise to 78 million by 2030. There is currently no cure for dementia, which is an umbrella term for a group of brain disorders including Alzheimer's disease, Lewy body dementia, and vascular dementia. Experts have identified several risk factors for dementia. Some are not changeable, such as age and genetics, while others are modifiable lifestyle factors.Following a healthy diet like the Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay (MIND) diet, becoming more physically active, staying socially engaged, and lowering your type 2 diabetes risk could all help prevent dementia.'Currently, there is no cure for dementia,' Rong Xu, PhD, professor of biomedical informatics and director of the Center for AI in Drug Discovery at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, told Medical News Today.'On the other hand, about 50% of dementia cases are preventable by targeting its 14 known modifiable risk factors. However, each risk factor contributes 1%-7% to the overall dementia risk. Therefore, we need prevention strategies that can simultaneously target multiple dementia risk factors,' Xu explained. Xu is the lead author of a new study which found that semaglutide — the active ingredient in type 2 diabetes and weight-loss glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist ( GLP-1) medications Ozempic and Wegovy — may help lower dementia risk in people with type 2 diabetes. The findings were published in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease.Why semaglutide for dementia prevention?For this study, researchers analyzed electronic health record data from more than 1.7 million adults in the United States with type 2 diabetes.Study participants were followed for three years to see if they developed any Alzheimer's disease-related dementias (ADRD). Types of ADRD included Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia, and frontotemporal dementia. In addition to semaglutide, scientists also looked at other type 2 diabetes medications, including insulin, metformin, and older generation GLP-1s.'Semaglutide is highly effective in simultaneously targeting several dementia risk factors, including obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases, and appears to also be beneficial for [counteracting] smoking and alcohol drinking,' Xu said. 'In addition, semaglutide has anti-inflammatory effects, and inflammation plays a significant role in the development and progression of all-cause dementias,' she continued. 'These suggest that semaglutide could be an effective pharmacological prevention strategy for dementia in high-risk populations such as patients with type 2 diabetes.'Semaglutide use helps lower vascular dementia riskAt the study's conclusion, researchers found that participants taking semaglutide had a significantly lower risk of developing vascular dementia than those taking any other type 2 diabetes medication, including other GLP-1s.'Our findings show evidence that semaglutide treatment in patients with diabetes appears to protect from vascular dementia and other dementia, but not frontotemporal or Lewy body dementia,' Xu explained. 'In addition, this is an associational study and no causation can be drawn.''For people concerned about dementia, this information can guide informed decisions on choosing anti-diabetic medications for diabetes management while mitigating dementia development,' she added. For the next steps in this research, Xu said the team plans to examine if tirzepatide — the active ingredient in GLP-1 medications Zepbound and Mounjaro — or other emerging newer generation GLP-1s have similar or stronger effects on dementia, as well as monitoring long-term side effects.'Preclinical and clinical studies are necessary to understand the mechanisms and establish causal effects through randomized trials,' she continued.'Economic and policy analyses are needed to examine the cost-effectiveness of integrating semaglutide and other pharmacotherapy-based prevention strategies with existing behavior-based approaches, such as exercise and diet in achieving substantial benefits for preserving cognitive function and preventing dementia,' Xu noted.How might semaglutide help lower dementia risk? MNT spoke with Mir Ali, MD, a board-certified general surgeon, bariatric surgeon and medical director of MemorialCare Surgical Weight Loss Center at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, CA, to find out more about how semaglutide might be able to help lower a person's dementia risk. 'This class of medications are in widespread use and currently the most effective weight loss medications available,' Ali, who was not involved in the current study, explained. 'Finding all the effects of these medications may expand possible indications for these drugs and possibly increase insurance coverage.' Hypothesizing on potential mechanisms of prevention, Ali told us:'To my knowledge the exact cause of Alzheimer's dementia is unknown; obesity in general causes a chronic inflammatory process through the body and this can contribute to many medical issues. Perhaps the decrease in chronic inflammation may lead to reduction in dementia risk.' MNT also spoke to Manisha Parulekar, MD, FACP, AGSF, CMD, director of the Division of Geriatrics at Hackensack University Medical Center, and co-director of the Center for Memory Loss and Brain Health at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey, about the current research.Parulekar, who was similarly not involved in this study, commented that people with 2 diabetes have a significantly increased risk of developing Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia, and this research suggests a shared underlying mechanism or pathway.'Additionally, GLP-1 receptor agonists (like semaglutide) have shown neuroprotective effects,' Parulekar continued. 'Preclinical studies (in animals) have demonstrated that GLP-1 receptor agonists can protect neurons, reduce inflammation in the brain, and improve cognitive function.''Semaglutide also improves insulin sensitivity and glucose control, and also promotes weight loss. These improvements in metabolic health could indirectly reduce the risk of dementia. For example, better glucose control can reduce vascular damage, which is a contributing factor to vascular dementia. Weight loss can also improve cardiovascular health, which is linked to brain health.'— Manisha Parulekar, MD, FACP, AGSF, CMD'Lastly, other diabetes medications have shown potential cognitive benefits,' she added. 'Some studies have suggested that other diabetes medications, such as metformin, may also have some protective effects against cognitive decline.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
38 minutes ago
- The Sun
Botched tummy lipo made my boobs triple in size due to a side effect – I'm not complaining as toy boys can't get enough
A WOMAN dubbed the claims her breasts got three sizes bigger after she had botched £7,382 liposuction on her stomach - and apparently, they are still growing. Elaina St James was happily sporting a DD-cup prior to her surgery, which targeted fat cells to give her a more toned appearance. 8 But the 58-year-old was stunned when she noticed an unexpected side effect. In the months following the 'botched' surgery – which left her stomach looking 'lumpy' - Elaina's chest inflated so much that the content creator was forced to overhaul her lingerie wardrobe to accommodate the changes. The cougar is now a 36G cup size - but this could increase further. 'I thought I was going crazy at first,' said Elaina, who boasts 430,000 Instagram followers @elainastjames. 'I asked my doctor if it was possible that the liposuction was causing my boobs to grow. 'I couldn't think what else it could be, as I hadn't made any major changes to my lifestyle. 'I was shocked when he immediately confirmed my suspicions. 'The doctor explained that when fat cells are removed during liposuction, sometimes the body compensates by kind of inflating them in other areas. 'Apparently, it's not that uncommon. 'I couldn't believe it. 'I was blessed with naturally large breasts, so it wasn't an area I had ever wanted to enhance. 'I had no idea this was even possible.' A 2007 study shared in the US' National Library of Medicine found that nearly half (48%) of participants reported an increase in their breast size following liposuction of the abdominal wall. Elaina, who hails from the Midwest but currently lives in North Carolina, opted to go under the knife after years of feeling self-conscious about her stomach. She said: 'I started out in this industry as an older woman, so I always had a 'mom bod' - but I just didn't feel comfortable being in front of the camera all of the time with my stomach out. 'Diet and exercise weren't making any difference in terms of toning it, so I started looking into liposuction.' Elaina explored different options before choosing to go with a large, national provider with 'great reviews'. But she felt dismayed with the finished look. A few months later, she looked at options to get the lipo revised. That's when she noticed the bizarre weight fluctuation to her chest. 8 8 8 Elaina said: 'I wasn't gaining weight anywhere else but I noticed my bras were becoming too tight. 'I had been wearing a DD cup size for years but suddenly they weren't fitting right. 'I was overflowing. 'I knew it was weird but I was so busy with moving and being a mom, that I didn't think too much about it.' More self-conscious than ever, once she was settled in her new home, Elaina paid another $10,000 to get liposuction with a second doctor in February 2025 - 16 months after her first procedure. This same physician confirmed that the first procedure had triggered her breasts to grow. Elaina said: 'They haven't stopped growing since. 'It's crazy. 'I now wear a 36G bra and with larger cup sizes you have to pay more for the brands that cater for them – so it's expensive having to get a whole new set. Do breasts get bigger after liposuction? Plastic & Aesthetic Surgeon Dr. Leonard Josipovic shared that it isn't uncommon for breasts to appear larger after lipo. It's not as strange as it sounds. When you have liposuction, fat cells in the treated area, such as the stomach, are permanently removed. But your body still has fat cells in other places. If you gain weight after the procedure, those remaining fat cells can grow larger. Since the treated area now has fewer fat cells, weight gain may show up more in other parts of the body like the back, upper arms, face or even the breasts. Breasts are made up of both glandular tissue and fat. The amount of glandular tissue is influenced by hormones, age and genetics, while the fat content can change depending on your overall body composition. So if someone gains weight after lipo, it's entirely possible that some of that fat gets stored in the breasts, making them look fuller. It's not that fat has physically moved from one place to another, it's just that your body now stores fat differently. Liposuction is a contouring procedure, not a weight loss treatment. If someone keeps their weight stable and sticks to a healthy lifestyle after surgery, fat won't suddenly shift to strange places. But if weight is gained, it will show up in areas that weren't treated - and that can include the breasts says Dr. Leonard Josipovic. 'It has cost me $450 to get new everyday bras that fit my new size. 'I'm hoping I don't grow much more, because it gets to a point when boobs become too big to manage.' While she isn't overly thrilled with the unexpected side effect, Elaina's new look has proved good for business. She said: 'It's not the worst thing in the world to have big boobs – especially in my line of work. 'Men love it. 8 8 'Some of my fans even spotted the increase before I did. 'Women's bodies fluctuate all the time, so it took a while for me to register the change. 'I started getting comments that my boobs looked bigger. 'I thought it was just because my stomach was thinner, giving the illusion of a larger chest – but they turned out to be right.' While Elaina values having a 'natural aesthetic', she is pleased with her new look – including the unexpected changes. She added: 'There's a lot of pressure to look good for women at every age and I'm all for it if you want to address insecurities. 'I remember getting comments saying I should do some sit-ups, put down the pizza or even go on Ozempic before having liposuction. 'I feel really confident in my body now and I'm embracing my new breasts too. 'Although I didn't intend to get a boob job, I'm definitely not complaining!' What are the risks of getting surgery abroad? IT'S important to do your research if you're thinking about having cosmetic surgery abroad. It can cost less than in the UK, but you need to weigh up potential savings against the potential risks. Safety standards in different countries may not be as high. No surgery is risk-free. Complications can happen after surgery in the UK or abroad. If you have complications after an operation in the UK, the surgeon is responsible for providing follow-up treatment. Overseas clinics may not provide follow-up treatment, or they may not provide it to the same standard as in the UK. Also, they may not have a healthcare professional in the UK you can visit if you have any problems. Source: NHS
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
CARVILL'S NOTES: Should boxing purists give Jake Paul a chance?
It is easy to dislike Jake Paul. As a congenitally lazy person, it is something that I have been doing for some time. Paul makes no attempt to come across as likeable. A lot of it must be theatre, the act of drawing eyeballs and attention, but his public image is that of the 'Problem Child', Steve Stifler in boxing gloves. Catch all the latest boxing action on DAZN There are a lot of marks against Paul, who fights this weekend on DAZN. Perhaps the most damaging when it comes to his dealings in the boxing world is that he said, four years ago, that he had early signs of CTE. 'I've gone and gotten brain scans,' he said at a press conference to promote his fight against Ben Askren in 2021, 'and have early signs of CTE.' No one knows exactly why Paul made those remarks. It may be that he thought he had shown symptoms resulting from concussions. Maybe a doctor had even told him that. He may have thought it was a good way to market the fight and to bolster his credibility. But there is no way to test for CTE pre-mortem and it is not something that should be taken lightly. A few years ago, I spent a few times with Alan Blyweiss, a former standout amateur who, after a disastrous start to his professional career (stopped in both fights), became one of Lennox Lewis's regular sparring partners for over a decade. In his mid-fifties, Alan suffers every day from the impact of his career. He struggles with balance, memory, cognition. His heart sometimes stops beating, and the pacemaker in his chest has to shock him back into life. He drinks copious amounts of water because his brain finds it difficult to regulate his body's temperature. He told me, honestly, when I was sat with him late one night. 'This CTE is going to kill me. I'm doing what I can to hold it back, but it is going to take my life.' So I feel like I have some kind of stake in this. I wanna retract my comments made about CTE as it relates to me and my medical history. It's a very serious condition that I should not have misspoken about. — Jake Paul (@jakepaul) April 16, 2021 There was a later suggestion of self-awareness as Paul walked back his 'diagnosis'. Posting to X/Twitter, he said: 'I wanna retract my comments made about CTE as it relates to me and my medical history. It's a very serious condition that I should not have misspoken about.' So let us give him the benefit of the doubt on that one. I am also tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his commitment. Training in Puerto Rico, Paul seems to genuinely be making efforts – as my colleague Harry Bullmore wrote earlier this week. Perhaps Paul is dedicated. Perhaps it is just a work. But here is an idea. Paul, rightly or wrongly, is one of the biggest names in the sport right now. That is why so many names are looking to him for a big payday. No one ever questioned the numbers when Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao fought ten years ago. But I saw some of the filings with the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC), which detailed how much all of the fighters on that card were paid. Let us just say that there was a steep drop-off after the headliners. So it would be a measure of character, for someone who earns so well outside of the ring, to spread some of that love within the four ropes that make up the workplace of his fellow boxers. We know the measure of Paul's character within the ring. Despite his 'Problem Child' persona, he has always fought graciously and cleanly. It would also prove to be a measure of the man for him to let some of that money spread around him. And on that note: When I was younger and making those decisions a young man makes that sets the course of his life, one of my big influences was the 1996 documentary When We Were Kings by Leon Gast. The film, which tells the story of the 1974 bout in Zaire between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman, won the Oscar for best documentary feature that year. And around 2001 and 2002, I watched it obsessively and, through it, saw the lives of Norman Mailer (overrated) and George Plimpton (underrated) as they jetted around the world, covering big-time boxing, writing books, and generally being scoundrels. That, I thought, is the life for me. So it was a delight when friend Carolyn introduced me to a friend of hers a few years ago, saying, 'Hey, you should meet my friend Pete. He writes on boxing.' We were sitting on the terrace of the Brufani Hotel in Perugia, Italy, while at the International Journalism Festival. This friend, Caroyln told me, had an uncle that had made a film about boxing. It turned out to be the niece of Leon Gast, who was beyond pleased that she had met someone who had been so influenced by her uncle's work. It seemed to make her night. It definitely made mine. Fighters fall out with one another all the time, and do so because it seems to make for decent ticket sales. Afterwards, as I wrote last week, they all admit that it was a pretence, they actually respect and like each other, and become friends. It is a cycle as dispiriting as it is boring. But there is one fallout that both seems genuine and shows no sign of resolution. I am talking, of course, about that between BoxRec and the WBA. The pair, it seems, fell out some time ago when it seems the WBA scraped a ton of data from BoxRec, then passed it on to Fight Fax. Being boxing, this is all kinds of murkiness about it, like stamping into the silt that sits at the bottom of a lake. As a consequence, BoxRec removed all mentions of the WBA from its rankings, meaning that many fighters are no longer considered by the recordkeeper to have been world champions. While it would be nice to have just one recognised champion per division – and fewer divisions at that – this seems to be the wrong way to go about it. Right now, the exclusion of the WBA from BoxRec weakens both entities. A few weeks ago, former cruiserweight champion Marco Huck was ringside in Hamburg to watched Labinot Xhoxhaj defend his EBU heavyweight title against Mourad Aliev (I was commentating that night, in the interests of disclosure). Huck told German newspaper BILD that he fancied a shot at Xhoxhaj, probably at some point in September in Berlin. This would mark yet another 'comeback' fight for Huck. He was scheduled to fight Joe Joyce in Hannover, Germany, in 2020 but pulled out at the last minute. His next fight was ten rounds against a Butterbean-like Dennis Lewandowski in front of a few hundred people in the small town of Braunlage. He was then set to fight Evgenios Lazaridis in the same town, but pulled out before the fight was later restaged in Berlin. I had organised travel to both Hannover and Braunlage for the cancelled fights, so I am a little sceptical that anything Huck arranges will actually happen. That said, if the fight is arranged for Berlin but then called off, at least this time I will not be stuck with train tickets or a hotel reservation that cannot be cancelled. Senior writer/editor Pete Carvill is the author of Death of a Boxer (a Daily Mail and Irish Times 'Sports Book of the Year') and A Duel of Bulls: Hemingway and Welles in Love and War. He is also a frequent blow-by-blow commentator on DAZN for boxing from Germany. Watch the very best boxing with a DAZN subscription DAZN is the home of combat sports, broadcasting over 185 fights a year from the world's best promoters, including Matchroom, Queensberry, Golden Boy, Misfits, PFL, BKFC, GLORY and more. An Annual Saver subscription is a one-off cost of £119.99 / $224.99 (for 12 months access), that's just 64p / $1.21 per fight. There is also a Monthly Flex Pass option (cancel any time) at £24.99 / $29.99 per month. A subscription includes weekly magazine shows, comprehensive fight library, exclusive interviews, behind-the-scenes documentaries, and podcasts and vodcasts.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Covid ‘lab leak' theory isn't just a rightwing conspiracy – pretending that's the case is bad for science
More than five years after the Covid-19 pandemic was declared, its origins remain a subject of intense – and often acrimonious – debate among scientists and the wider public. There are two broad, competing theories. The natural-origins hypotheses suggest the pandemic began when a close relative of Sars-CoV-2 jumped from a wild animal to a human through the wildlife trade. In contrast, proponents of lab-leak theories argue that the virus emerged when Chinese scientists became infected through research-associated activities. A perplexing aspect of the controversy is that prominent scientists continue to publish studies in leading scientific journals that they say provide compelling evidence for the natural-origins hypotheses. Yet rather than resolving the issue, each new piece of evidence seems to widen the divide further. In many parts of the world, including the US, France and Germany, public opinion is increasingly shifting towards lab-leak theories, despite the lack of definitive evidence. In other words, a growing number of people believe that research-associated activities are just as likely, if not more so, to have caused the pandemic. A new documentary by the Swiss film-maker Christian Frei, titled Blame: Bats, Politics and a Planet Out of Balance, places the blame for this divide squarely on the so-called 'rightwing fever swamp', including the likes of Steve Bannon and Fox News. According to Frei, it promotes misinformation and conspiracy theories about the origins of Covid-19 for political gain, thereby confusing and misleading the public. As a participant in the film and a journalist who has spent the past five years writing a book on the origins of emerging diseases, I must respectfully disagree. At its core, the controversy is not a left-right issue, but a symptom of deeply entrenched public distrust of science. By framing it along the political divide – and by cherrypicking extreme examples to suit its narrative, the documentary does a disservice to the public interest. This is not to deny that the question of the pandemic's origins has been politicised from the outset. It was indeed challenging for left-leaning scholars such as the biosafety expert Filippa Lentzo of King's College London to speak openly about the plausibility of lab-leak scenarios, because they risked being perceived as aligning with a rightwing agenda. However, many outspoken left-leaning researchers like Lentzos have been key drivers of lab-leak theories. While researching my book, I encountered numerous credible and well-respected experts on emerging diseases who also believe the question of Covid-19 origins is far from settled. Their views are grounded in decades of professional expertise. Far from a rightwing fever swamp, these scholars have lent scientific legitimacy to the debate. They are not convinced that the studies published in leading scientific journals supporting natural-origins theories are as compelling as the authors have claimed. Plus the studies are based on limited data as a result of China's lack of transparency and limited political will to investigate, making significant uncertainties unavoidable. Few people would claim with absolute certainty to know how the pandemic began. Both sides are gathering evidence to support their case, yet neither can fully rule out the possibility put forward by the other. This lack of clarity is not unlike what we see with most emerging diseases. For instance, we still don't know how the devastating Ebola outbreak in west Africa began in 2014. The core issue behind the Covid-19 origins controversy is fundamentally a crisis of trust rather than a mere information problem. It reflects longstanding public anxieties over virus research. Strong emotions such as fear and distrust play a crucial role in human cognition. Simply presenting more facts doesn't always lead to a converging of opinions – and can sometimes even widen the divide. Indeed, the storm of public distrust in virus research had been gathering long before the pandemic. In 2011, two research teams sparked public outcry by announcing the creation of more transmissible variants of H5N1 (bird flu). This led to a pause in US federal funding for research that makes viruses more transmissible or virulent, known as gain-of-function studies, and the establishment of a new regulatory framework. However, a profound sense of unease persisted, driven by the perception that virologists, funding agencies and research institutions had failed to sufficiently address public concerns and anxieties, coupled with a lack of transparency and inclusiveness in decision-making. The Covid-19 origins controversy sailed straight into the middle of this brewing storm. Did the virus originate from the kind of gain-of-function research that critics had long warned about? How might even the slightest possibility of this have influenced the behaviours of virologists, funding agencies and research institutions – prompting them to protect their reputations and preserve political backing? Some scientists assert evidence supporting natural-origins hypotheses with excessive confidence and show little tolerance for dissenting views. They have appeared eager to shut down the debate, repeatedly and since early 2020. For instance, when their work was published in the journal Science in 2022, they proclaimed the case closed and lab-leak theories dead. Even researchers leaning towards natural origins theories, such as virus ecologist Vincent Munster of Rocky Mountains Laboratories in Hamilton, Montana, told me they lamented that some of their colleagues defend their theories like a religion'. No one embodies the crisis of trust in science more than Peter Daszak, the former president of EcoHealth Alliance. A series of missteps on his part has helped to fuel public distrust. In early 2020, for instance, he organised a statement by dozens of prominent scientists in the Lancet, which strongly condemned 'conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin', without disclosing his nearly two-decade collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology as a conflict of interest. Similarly, he denies that his own collaboration with the Wuhan lab involved gain-of-function research, even though Shi Zhengli – the Chinese scientist who led the bat-borne coronavirus studies – has openly acknowledged that the lab's work produced at least one genetically modified virus more virulent than its parental strain. (That work is not directly relevant to the origins of Covid-19.) The documentary claims that attacks on EcoHealth Alliance and the spread of lab-leak conspiracy theories have fuelled distrust in science. In reality, it's the other way round: public distrust in science, fuelled by the unresolved H5N1 gain-of-function controversy and by lack of transparency and humility from scientists such as Daszak, has driven scepticism and increased support for lab-leak theories. Such errors of judgment and inappropriate behaviour, not uncommon among scientists and not limited to the Covid-19 origins debate, can affect how the public perceives scientists and the trustworthiness of their claims, and how people interpret evidence. As the social scientist Benjamin Hurlbut of Arizona State University puts it: the problem isn't an anti-science public, but rather a scientific community that labels a sceptical public grappling with legitimate trust issues as anti-science or conspiracy theorists. A recent Science editorial states that 'scientists should better explain the scientific process and what makes it so trustworthy'. This reflects the persistent influence of the traditional 'deficit model' of science communication, which assumes that trust can be built by providing mere information. But the public's relationship with science goes beyond understanding facts or methods. Trust cannot be manufactured on demand. It must be cultivated over time through transparency, accountability, humility and relationship-building. Scientists must do more to earn it. Jane Qiu is an award-winning independent science writer in Beijing. The reporting was supported by a grant from the Pulitzer Center
