Tuesday, December 31, 2024

Happy NY MMXXV - Making friends with your past and future selves

 Happy New Year 2025






Making friends with your past and future selvesKnowable


The Walmart Effect The Atlantic


Are you better value for money than AI? The Register

 

The Murmur of Engines London Review of Books. Perry Anderson

 

Century-Scale Storage Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab


Open Culture – includes YouTube Video: “The New York Times Presents the 100 Best Books of the 21st Century, Selected by 503 Novelists, Poets & Critics.”

Related content:
The 10 Greatest Books Ever, According to 125 Top Authors (Download Them for Free)
29 Lists of Recommended Books Created by Well-Known Authors, Artists & Thinkers: Jorge Luis Borges, Patti Smith, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, David Bowie & More
The 100 Best Novels: A Literary Critic Creates a List in 1898
Joseph Brodsky’s List of 83 Books You Should Read to Have an Intelligent Conversation
Based in Seoul, Colin Marshall writes and broadcasts on cities, language, and culture. His projects include the Substack newsletter Books on Cities and the book The Stateless City: a Walk through 21st-Century Los Angeles.
See also via LitHub – 50 Contemporary Poets on the Best Poems they Read in 2024


What You Should Know When Joining Bluesky

 

What You Should Know When Joining Bluesky

EFF: “Bluesky promises to rethink social media by focusing on openness and user control. But what does this actually mean for the millions of people joining the site? November was a good month for alternatives to X. Many users hit their balking point after two years of controversial changes turned Twitter into X, a restrictive hub filled with misinformation and hate speech. Musk’s involvement in the U.S. presidential election was the last straw for many who are now looking for greener pastures.  Threads, the largest alternative, grew about 15% with 35 million new users. However, the most explosive growth came from Bluesky, seeing over 500% growth and a total user base of over 25 million users at the time of writing. We’ve dug into the nerdy details of how Mastodon, Threads, and Bluesky compare, but given this recent momentum it’s important to clear up some questions for new Bluesky users, and what this new approach to the social web really means for how you connect with people online. Note that Bluesky is still in an early stage, and many big changes are anticipated from the project. Answers here are accurate as of the time of writing, and will indicate the company’s future plans where possible.”

  

How I Use My RSS Feed for Bluesky and Mastodon

Lifehacker: “It’s understandable if you’re a little burnt out on social media at the moment. I put off setting up a Bluesky account for years, mostly because I didn’t want yet another service to think about. At the same time, though, a lot of interesting people have shifted their posting to alternative sites like Bluesky account. 

The good news: you can follow users on either site without ever setting anything up. That’s because every Bluesky and Mastodon account offers an RSS feed. This means you can use any of the best RSS readers to follow posts from any specific user. This is an ideal solution if you mostly want to keep up with the posts of a couple people. You could use this if there’s a writer whose articles and ideas you want to keep track of, for example. The RSS feeds for both services aren’t exactly obvious. Here’s how to find them…”



Feeling depressed? Food could be the cause

 

Feeling depressed? Food could be the cause

Modern diets may be one cause of mental disorders and depression, as well as neurodegenerative disease. Here’s how you can lessen your risk.

Evidence is now incontrovertible that a diet high in ultra-processed food is devastating for human metabolic health. But the effect of the inflammation and insulin resistance in humans that highly processed foods tend to trigger across years of high consumption is not isolated to the body’s digestive systems. 
It’s well established in scientific literature that there is a link between diet quality, brain health and susceptibility to suffer mental illness and neurodegenerative disease. So why have we been so slow in adopting what seems to be an inexpensive and highly accessible intervention for a widely suffered condition such as depression when numerous studies have shown reversal of even significant depression through dietary changes and even better success when combined with exercise? 
Why are we not telling people as they age that reducing inflammation in the brain through diet could have a large impact on susceptibility to dementia? 
It no doubt boils down partly to a lack of awareness across the community of the emerging field known as nutritional psychiatry, which explores linkages between overall diet quality and common disorders such as depression and anxiety. And part of the blame for the lack of communication on the link between diet and brain health to consumers lies at the feet of general practitioners. 

GPs at the heart of the issue

Most Australians see a GP at least once a year. Many of these patients are metabolically unhealthy with markers of inflammation growing by the year if they only knew it. 
There are a growing number of GPs who are interested in lifestyle medicine and increasingly are practising it. But far too many GPs fail to read scientific literature even when a willing and highly educated patient presents it to them, and GPs carry a large part of the blame for doling out antidepressant medication at what is a highly concerning rate. 
GPs will argue that they spend enormous amounts of time on mental health matters with patients, and of course they do, but discussions of the links between diet, inflammation and brain health, and diet prescriptions accordingly, are rare even though the literature is clear that such changes can reverse depression in some cases.
Lifestyle interventions for mental illness are not a novel idea. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatry clinical guidelines for the treatment of mood disorders, for the first time anywhere, now positions “foundational” medicine – involving a healthy diet, movement and sleep patterns – centrally. 
And this year the World Psychiatric Association and the American Psychiatric Association chose to focus on lifestyle psychiatry as their key themes. 
The reason is clear: although mental illness accounts for the second highest burden of disease in many countries including Australia, pharmacotherapy is ineffective for many and can come with enormous harm, while exercise and other lifestyle therapies have high efficacy and little downside if done safely. Drug therapies, including antidepressants and antipsychotics, and psychotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy have been said to avert less than half the burden of disease. 
Now there is consistent observational and interventional data to suggest diet may be a modifiable risk factor for mental illness. 
There is increasing understanding among scientists and researchers as to the neurobiological mechanisms that are likely to be modulated by diet. 
These mechanisms include inflammation (in substantial part triggered by the consumption of highly processed food, refined carbohydrates and unhealthy fats), oxidative stress (or the release of harmful “free radical” molecules that cause inflammation), the gut microbiome, epigenetic modifications and neuroplasticity. 
“What we do know from a very, very large body of evidence around the world is that people who have higher diet quality, higher in whole foods and lower in ultra-processed and unhealthful foods, have about a 30 to 35 per cent reduction in risk for having depression,” Deakin University nutritional psychiatry distinguished professor Felice Jacka says. “And we see this prospectively; it doesn’t seem to be explained by reverse causality such as people eating a particular way because of their mental illness.” 
Jacka, who is the founder and director of Deakin’s Food & Mood Centre, says: “We have published full clinical trials showing that if you take people with depression, even moderate to severe clinical depression, and you help support them to improve their diet, that will have a very profound benefit to their depressive symptoms.” 
While studies decades ago centred on single-factor dietary effects such as whether fish oil supplements were associated with a reduction in symptoms of depression, to understand the links between nutrition and brain health researchers during the past 15 years or so have looked at the whole diet and its interaction with numerous underlying mechanisms in which the body responds to certain foods. 
As described in a 2020 paper in Nature Molecular Biology, “the mechanisms of action associating diet with health outcomes are complex, multifaceted, interacting and not restricted to any one biological pathway”. 
Epigenetics, the health of the gut microbiota, and the profound effect of obesity if it exists can all come into play. But primarily it is the role of inflammation and oxidative stress inside the brain that has attracted the most scrutiny in nutritional psychiatry. 
A subfield known as metabolic psychiatry, aimed at reducing these toxic processes in the brain through a ketogenic diet, also has sprung up more recently.

Why do some foods cause inflammation in our bodies? 

Of greatest concern in Western countries where the food industry is powerful and mass produces industrial foods that are of low nutrition, high sugar, low fibre and high in refined carbohydrates is that the consumption of these ultra-processed foods are horrendous not only for people’s metabolic systems but also brain health. 
Consumption of too many of these types of foods leads to persistently high blood glucose and insulin levels in the body that eventually results in insulin resistance. Insulin resistance can affect not only the pancreas but also the brain, resulting in a brain flooded with glucose but with not enough insulin, so it struggles to generate enough power but is left coping with an excess of glucose that can’t be converted into energy. 
This high blood glucose floods the brain with inflammation and oxidative stress, damaging its mitochondria (the cells responsible for turning glucose into energy), as American psychiatrist and author Georgia Ede says. 
“The glucose will stick to important components of cells inside the brain – proteins and lipids and nucleic acids like DNA,” Ede says. 
“This stickiness will cause these molecules to become crippled and dysfunctional. There will be certain advanced glycation end products generated. Advanced glycation end products are largely responsible for premature ageing of tissues throughout the body, including the skin and the brain and so forth. So too much sugar will lead to a lot of problems with cellular function within the brain. The brain mounts an immune response to clear away these sticky clusters. And that’s where you get the inflammation and oxidative stress. The brain will deliberately release inflammatory cytokines and oxygen free radicals as the first response to other first responders in the immune response to sound the alarm – we’ve got a problem here, we need to clear away these problematic clusters.” 
The effect is also replicated in the gut and thus amplified in the brain. Highly refined foods with sugars provide easy nutrition for bacteria in our gut, leading to unchecked bacterial overgrowth. This triggers the release of inflammatory chemicals that are absorbed into our bloodstream. When we consume harmful fats, especially trans fats, the slow breakdown of these substances also releases chemicals that promote inflammation. Refining grains – that is, removing the fibre from whole grains – also promotes bacterial overgrowth. 
“So we have this chronic inflammatory and excessive oxidative stress situation inside the brain,” says Harvard-trained Ede, author of the book Change Your Diet, Change Your Brain. 
“If it persists or occurs too often it can lead to a whole cascade of very damaging effects inside the brain including neurotransmitter imbalances, but especially something called glutamate excitotoxicity, where a level of a particular neurotransmitter in the brain called glutamate can rise to a level 100 times its baseline. 
“We see high glutamate levels in certain psychiatric conditions, the best example being bipolar disorder. When people have high glutamate levels, the brain is on high alertness. It’s really in overdrive, it’s a sort of hyper-excitable state, where the brain is too active and too reactive. So you can see lots of anxiety, insomnia and irritability. 
“And you see this in epilepsy as well; there are a lot of similarities. So the brain is simply overstimulated by this being in this emergency state of mind too often.” 
As well as affecting the functioning of key neurotransmitters, a pro-inflammatory diet that triggers oxidative stress in the brain affects functioning of nerve pathways. Inflammation can trigger the hypothalamus to instruct the adrenal glands to release the stress hormone cortisol. Having high levels of stress hormones affects our mental state.
Other deep areas of our brain including the hippocampus constantly develop new nerve pathways or alter existing ones, a process known as neuroplasticity. Chemical messengers (brain-derived neurotrophic factor) control these deep brain responses. There is good evidence that a healthy diet is responsible for normal nerve growth in our brains and an unhealthy pro-inflammatory diet reduces the amount of BDNF in our nervous system. This derails the healthy function of our brain in response to new experiences.
The nutrient tryptophan also is involved in nerve function and is absorbed from the colon. There is good evidence that absorption from the foods we eat – chicken and milk, for example – is affected by bacterial growth in the gut. When we have abnormal gut function from an unhealthy diet it affects tryptophan absorption into our bodies and this has a negative effect on nerve functions.
The Food & Mood Centre at Deakin University, along with the Australasian Society for Lifestyle Medicine, has developed evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the management of major depressive disorder using lifestyle-based approaches. 

DO’S

● Increase consumption of fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grains, nuts, seeds, herbs and spices as tolerated.
● Eat minimally processed wholefoods. Wholefoods are single-ingredient plant or animal foods that can be found in nature (for example, an egg, a fish or a piece of fruit), are perish­able and require little to no process­ing to be edible. 
Include a wide variety of vegetables especially leafy greens.
● Include a high consumption of foods rich in omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (for example, salmon, omega-3 enriched eggs) and fibre (for example, beans, vegetables, nuts and fruit).
● Consume red meat in moderation and opt for lean sources rather than processed and/or fatty cuts.
● Include extra virgin olive oil or other polyunsaturated oils (for example, rice bran, canola oil) as the main source of cooking and added oil.
● Consume daily recommended water intake.  


DON’TS

● Avoid ultra-processed foods. These include breakfast cereals, protein and muesli bars, potato and corn chips, commercial breads, dairy desserts, processed meat such as ham and salami, frozen foods such as chicken nuggets, all fast food.  
● Avoid refined carbohydrates, which have undergone processing that removes the nutrients from grains. This includes all white flour-based products including white breads and bagels, and white rice.  
● Avoid refined sugars such as in flavoured yoghurts, cakes, sodas and smooth­ies, pasta sauces, condi­ments and breakfast cereals.  
● Avoid saturated fat sources such as red meat and ice cream.  
● Avoid excessive alcohol consumption. 
And the energy required for normal brain function and nerve growth is derived from small components of the body’s cells called mitochondria. There is strong evidence that poor mitochondrial function related to an unhealthy diet – particularly one high in saturated fats – leads to abnormal nerve growth and brain function.
All of these changes in the body in response to what an individual eats cause epigenetic changes that overlay an individual’s DNA and change the body’s protein function. There is strong evidence that diet early in life, including a mother’s diet while a child is in utero, affects the way our DNA functions. Poor diet and lack of exercise – sources of inflammation and oxidative stress – can change a child’s DNA for life and promote poorer brain and nerve function, and mental health issues such as depression across the lifespan.
All of the processes described above are also risk factors for the development of neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The rise of a highly processed industrial diet and the brain inflammation it triggers may be a factor supercharging the prevalence of these conditions alongside the ageing population. 

‘The elephant in the room’

While further study into the effects of diet on the brain and application of the principles of nutritional psychiatry may be welcome for patients, Jacka points out that it will not deal with what she calls “the elephant in the room”. 
“The elephant in the room is our industrialised food system that costs the globe upwards of $20 trillion a year in its negative effects on human health,” Jacka says. 
“And it also costs us trillions in loss of biodiversity and costs to the environment. That loss of biodiversity in the environment, in the soil, in our food, directly relates to the loss of biodiversity in humans inside our microbiomes. 
“And we’re seeing this massive increase in disorders that are related to the loss of microbiome health – things such as food allergies, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, type one diabetes, cancers in young people and, of course, things like ADHD, autism spectrum disorder and auto-immune diseases.
“As people who are working in this field, we strongly suspect the rise of these conditions relates to the impact of industrialised food systems on the microbiome, through encodings in the food chain, through loss of microbes in the soil and in our food, loss of nutrients, loss of phytochemicals.
“The fact that we have no decent policies to improve our industrial food environment because the power of lobbyists is so huge is disgraceful. You’re talking about the biggest industries in the world. 
“In America 70 per cent of food in the food chain is ultra-processed. The power of those lobbyists to influence or stop any form of food policy reform is immense. 
“And if you think about the cost to human health, to productivity, to wellbeing, for the environment, in Australia, consider if there is one single thing in place to prevent that or to improve that. It’s sort of such a contrast with our very tough stance on other areas, like tobacco control. 
“It just doesn’t make sense.”

Are we becoming a post-literate society?

Are we becoming a post-literate society? 

Technology has changed the way many of us consume information, from complex pieces of writing to short video clips 
SARAH O'CONNOR


“Human intelligence,” the cultural critic Neil Postman once wrote, “is among the most fragile things in nature. It doesn’t take much to distract it, suppress it, or even annihilate it.”
The year was 1988, a former Hollywood actor was in the White House, and Postman was worried about the ascendancy of pictures over words in American media, culture and politics. Television “conditions our minds to apprehend the world through fragmented pictures and forces other media to orient themselves in that direction,” he argued in an essay in his book Conscientious Objections. “A culture does not have to force scholars to flee to render them impotent. A culture does not have to burn books to assure that they will not be read . . . There are other ways to achieve stupidity.”

One Must-Read

This article was featured in the One Must-Read newsletter, where we recommend one remarkable story each weekday. Sign up for the newsletter here
What might have seemed curmudgeonly in 1988 reads more like prophecy from the perspective of 2024. This month, the OECD released the results of a vast exercise: in-person assessments of the literacy, numeracy and problem-solving skills of 160,000 adults aged 16-65 in 31 different countries and economies. Compared with the last set of assessments a decade earlier, the trends in literacy skills were striking. Proficiency improved significantly in only two countries (Finland and Denmark), remained stable in 14, and declined significantly in 11, with the biggest deterioration in Korea, Lithuania, New Zealand and Poland. 
Among adults with tertiary-level education (such as university graduates), literacy proficiency fell in 13 countries and only increased in Finland, while nearly all countries and economies experienced declines in literacy proficiency among adults with below upper secondary education. Singapore and the US had the biggest inequalities in both literacy and numeracy. 
“Thirty per cent of Americans read at a level that you would expect from a 10-year-old child,” Andreas Schleicher, director for education and skills at the OECD, told me — referring to the proportion of people in the US who scored level 1 or below in literacy. “It is actually hard to imagine — that every third person you meet on the street has difficulties reading even simple things.”
In some countries, the deterioration is partly explained by an ageing population and rising levels of immigration, but Schleicher says these factors alone do not fully account for the trend. His own hypothesis would come as no surprise to Postman: that technology has changed the way many of us consume information, away from longer, more complex pieces of writing, such as books and newspaper articles, to short social media posts and video clips. 
At the same time, social media has made it more likely that you “read stuff that confirms your views, rather than engages with diverse perspectives, and that’s what you need to get to [the top levels] on the [OECD literacy] assessment, where you need to distinguish fact from opinion, navigate ambiguity, manage complexity,” Schleicher explained.
The implications for politics and the quality of public debate are already evident. These, too, were foreseen. In 2007, writer Caleb Crain wrote an article called “Twilight of the Books” in The New Yorker magazine about what a possible post-literate culture might look like. In oral cultures, he wrote, cliché and stereotype are valued, conflict and name-calling are prized because they are memorable, and speakers tend not to correct themselves because “it is only in a literate culture that the past’s inconsistencies have to be accounted for”. Does that sound familiar?
These trends are not unavoidable or irreversible. Finland demonstrates the potential for high-quality education and strong social norms to sustain a highly literate population, even in a world where TikTok exists. England shows the difference that improved schooling can make: there, the literacy proficiency of 16-24-year-olds was significantly better than a decade ago.
The question of whether AI could alleviate or exacerbate the problem is more tricky. Systems like ChatGPT can perform well on many reading and writing tasks: they can parse reams of information and reduce it to summaries.
A number of studies suggest that, when deployed in the workplace, these tools can significantly increase the performance of lower-skilled workers. In one study, researchers tracked the impact of an AI tool on customer service agents who provided technical support via written chat boxes. The AI tool, trained on the conversational patterns of top performers, provided real-time text suggestions to agents on how to respond to customers. The study found lower-skilled workers became more productive and their communication patterns became more similar to those of higher-skilled workers. 
David Autor, an economics professor at MIT, has even argued that AI tools could enable more workers to perform higher-skilled roles and help restore “the middle-skill, middle-class heart of the US labour market”.
But, as Autor says, in order to make good use of a tool to “level up” your skills, you need a decent foundation to begin with. Absent that, Schleicher worries that people with poor literacy skills will become “naive consumers of prefabricated content”.
In other words, without solid skills of your own, it is only a few short steps from being supported by the machine, to finding yourself dependent on it, or subject to it.

From Cleopatra to Wellington, leaders have always taxed beer. But Australia’s system has made beer extra pricey

 One man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage to reach the unreachable stars; and the world will be better for this.

Miguel de Cervantes



From Cleopatra to Wellington, leaders have always taxed beer. But Australia’s system has made beer extra pricey



Crypto is for Criming Paul Krugman, Krugman wonks out

Forget Chrome—Google Starts Tracking All Your Devices In 8 Weeks Forbes


Apple is reportedly working on a smart doorbell system that could unlock your door with Face IDEngadget


No one has ever known so much about healthy eating and been less successful at following her own advice.
My first byline in a national magazine appeared in the August 8, 1995, issue of Woman’s Day under the headline “What’s Sabotaging Your Diet?” Woman’s Day, that bastion of the checkout line, was known for unironic covers featuring decadent desserts under headlines about healthy eating. 

This particular issue’s cover featured the title of my article over a photo of a chocolate cake frosted to look like a sunflower. I was 23, newly married, living in a studio in Brooklyn, and making $18,000 a year. I’d been an editorial assistant at the magazine for eight months and was eager for my first story. 

When the features editor said she needed a writer for a diet piece, I stuck my hand in the air. Almost as much as the byline, though, I wanted the advice. I was just under 200 pounds at the time and anxious to avoid crossing that dietary Rubicon. 

For the story, I talked with doctors and dietitians and got their best tips on staving off cravings, eating healthy, and keeping the number on the scale from creeping up any further than it had already. None of it helped. For years magazines assigned me similar stories while I continued to gain weight. In the ’90s and early 2000s, women’s magazines wanted as much diet content as they could print. For me that meant an extra source of income to supplement my meager pay, not to mention a career boost for an ambitious young writer. 

Daniel Engber: Ozempic killed diet and exercise My byline appeared under such headlines as “Prime Time for Pig-Outs,” in Fitness, and “Facing Fat,” in Self. I wrote so many diet and nutrition articles that I was even hired as an editor at the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, of all places, writing more scientific fare, such as “From Aspartame to Xenical” and “Type 2 Diabetes on the Rise in Children.” At the same time, undone by emotional eating and stress, I gained an additional 30 pounds. 

No one has ever known so much about healthy eating and been less successful at following her own advice. For more than three decades, I fought a losing battle with weight gain. At its worst, in March 2017, my weight hit 298 pounds, a number I can’t believe I’m writing down for the world to see. At 5 foot 8, I now had a BMI of 45. Obese. I’ve never admitted my exact weight to anyone other than my doctor—even my husband didn’t know. Still, no one but me was ever fooled.
 I lived under the delusion that if I never told anyone, the number would not exist. I know what the world thinks of fat people. I’ve endured the way people eye my cart at the grocery store, how they watch what I order in restaurants. People never stop asking me if I’ve tried this or that latest dieting fad. The answer—always—is yes. 

I went through the low-fat craze, the low-sugar craze, the low-carb craze. I swore off eating after 7 p.m. I fasted intermittently. I tried Herbalife, SlimFast, Seattle Sutton, Nutrisystem, Weight Watchers, even a doctor-supervised weight clinic with expensive pills and powders. I joined gyms, signed up for a Couch to 5K race, bought a bike, bought a yoga mat, bought an elliptical trainer. Nothing worked. I would put in weeks or months of teeth-grinding work starving myself and exercising to lose 20 or 25 pounds, then watch it come back a couple of months later. Then, in September 2023, my doctor handed me a prescription for Mounjaro, a diabetes drug that, when used off-label, has been found to help patients lose weight. Mounjaro, like Ozempic and Wegovy and others, mimics the hormone GLP-1, which works to suppress appetite. 

Since I began taking the drug, I’ve lost almost 80 pounds with very little effort. Medical science has done what no diet-and-exercise plan ever could, changing my entire relationship with what I eat and when and why. I didn’t grow up fat, but I did learn how to diet at a young age, probably much too young. I was 9 or 10 the first time I restricted my meals, usually skipping breakfast, sometimes lunch too. 
I was an average weight, so no one suggested it to me. I just did it. I liked the ascetic feeling of missing a meal, that tightness in the gut. 
At 12 and 13, I would exercise to the VHS tape of 20-Minute Workout with my mother and my sisters. It was just something everyone did, part of learning to be an adult. In high school, I learned to cook. My mother would often leave instructions so dinner would be hot when she got home from work: spaghetti and salad, grilled chicken and roasted veggies, tacos. 
Usually the only indulgence in our house was my mother’s unappetizing low-fat ice-cream. It was easy to eat healthy when few of the food decisions were up to me. My senior year of high school, I weighed 132 pounds and wore a size 10. I didn’t think much about food because I didn’t have to. But unlike some friends I know—who don’t care at all what they eat, who treat meals like brushing their teeth, a necessary form of self-maintenance that doesn’t require much attention or result in much pleasure—I’ve always enjoyed food. 
I like the crunch of sunflower seeds on my salad, the melt of cheese on a burger. When I was in college, I took a part-time job at McDonald’s. I could walk there and, hey, meals were included. The freshman 15 suddenly turned into 30. I took a weight-lifting course and swam laps and bought a bike. I quit my fast-food gig for a part-time office job. Though the weight gain slowed, it never stopped. 
Throughout my 20s and 30s, I gained five to 10 pounds a year, a result not of frequent pig-outs but of small, daily failures: that one extra piece of pizza, a couple of Oreos after dinner, a slice of the office birthday cake. 
If I skipped breakfast, I would be ravenous by 11, with shaking hands and a foggy brain and no self-control. The author of “What’s Sabotaging Your Diet?” knew that missing breakfast was a problem, but if I was in a hurry to get out the door, sometimes I did just that. One of my worst triggers was bedtime. I can’t count the number of nights I lay in bed unable to sleep from hunger until I gave in and had a piece of toast, a little peanut butter.

 The author of “Prime Time for Pig-Outs” knew that eating late at night was bad, but I could either eat something or suffer insomnia. Stress could also trigger emotional eating. That job at the journal turned nightmarish when new management took over, fired the beloved editors I’d worked for, and put me in (temporary) charge of publishing the entire publication with a depleted staff. I was up at 6:30 a.m. and in bed at midnight, with no time in between for exercise or cooking, shoveling food in like a zombie between meetings. 
By the time I quit that job, I was 245 pounds and I was miserable. I had been interviewing experts and publishing diet and nutrition advice for almost a decade, and for just as long I’d been failing to make any of it work for me. I felt like the world’s biggest hypocrite. I started to think, Maybe this is it. Maybe I’m just going to be fat forever, and there’s nothing I can do about it. Diet is a word that now seems old-fashioned, like that wine-and-egg plan from Vogue that sometimes still circulates on social media, a holdover from a bygone era, along with pantyhose and memorizing phone numbers. 
Today we talk about healthy lifestyles, mindful eating, about getting fit and taking care of our bodies. Or we reject weight loss as a goal altogether, embrace body positivity, fat acceptance, health at any size. Dieting is out and self-love is in, except that it isn’t, not even close. The old women’s magazines are gone, for the most part—victims of a changing media landscape—but on Instagram and TikTok and Facebook and everywhere else, people are still looking for solutions. 
Give me something that works, they ask. Please. For years I wasn’t writing the diet articles just for readers; I was writing them for myself. I was both a cog in the toxic diet-media complex and its reason for existence. Each time I would hold out hope that the next recommendation would unlock my weight-loss success. 
I couldn’t blame the magazines or their readers for wanting it too, the one bit of advice that would work for them, that would finally make a difference. I would try, and fail, and try again. And I was getting very tired of failure. The first time my doctor mentioned bariatric surgery, I was desperate enough to consider it.
 I learned that in addition to losing part of my stomach, I would need to stick to a liquid diet both before and after surgery, and that some people experience severe side effects. Because losing body parts seemed a bridge too far even for me, I tried healthy-at-any-size acceptance instead, which was fine until it wasn’t. Last year at my annual checkup, my doctor told me that I was at risk of diabetes. As he poked at my toes, checking for gangrene, I decided I no longer had room for delusions.
 A friend had been telling me about Wegovy and the difference it was making for her, so I asked if my doctor could give me a prescription. His relief was palpable. Why, he wondered, had I waited so long? The first few days on Mounjaro, I felt mildly off—slightly queasy, like I might be coming down with the flu. 

Then, as my body adjusted, hunger returned, but not urgently. I would get full faster, sometimes after only a bite or two. Rich and heavy foods no longer sounded appealing. Gradually the effects would lessen, and then my doctor would up my dosage. The cycle repeated. All of a sudden, all the things I’d learned from writing those “tips and tricks” articles actually started to work. 
Cut back on carbs? Done. 
Eat lots of protein and veggies? A pleasure. No snacking after dinner? Easy. 
The real change, though, happened in my head. Thoughts of food—the background noise of my life for decades—were gone. I no longer had to white-knuckle my way through the day to lose weight. At a recent work event, a friend asked what we should do about lunch. “Huh, lunch,” I said. “I didn’t even think about lunch.” To say that this is a revelation is an understatement. It’s as though I woke up not in someone else’s body, but in someone else’s brain. 
It’s like a reset, a return to the way I felt when I was younger and could ignore food when I chose to, when it didn’t matter to me if I skipped an occasional meal. I don’t get shaky and foggy if I miss breakfast or am too busy for lunch. I feel, instead, a profound sense of freedom. 
Apparently this is the real effect of the drug: Scientists thought that GLP-1would work on the human gut, but it actually works best on the human brain, as Sarah Zhang reported in this magazine. The friend who told me about using Wegovy checks in with me regularly to share her own success, and she reports similar mental changes. “This must be what skinny women feel like all the time,” we say, and marvel that such a thing is possible. 
When i reached the 50-pound weight-loss mark, almost a year ago—a number so unreal that I almost thought I’d hallucinated it—I had my husband take a picture of me in the same blue-and-white sundress I’d worn in a similar photo two years earlier, when I was near my top weight. It made for the classic “after” picture, in which the changes to my body were now completely clear: My face and belly were thinner; my bust was smaller. I hadn’t hallucinated anything. 
Nervously, I posted the photos to my Facebook and Instagram accounts along with the announcement of the milestone weight loss. I felt vulnerable letting people in my life see that before-and-after comparison. 
But I’ve decided to open up about everything, to stop trying to fool myself by hiding. What was really sabotaging my diet, all those years, was the idea that if I kept pretending, 
I could be happy at my higher weight. I was not. The congratulations started pouring in. “Oh my God, you look great.” “Keep up the good work!” “Congratulations!” 
Then they’d message me privately: How did you do it? Maybe those people thought I’d be ashamed to admit that I use Mounjaro, but I’m not. Given my long history as a diet-tips pusher, dispensing all that pithy advice, I figure the least I can do now is be honest about the one thing that’s actually worked. Shayla Love: Understanding desire in the age of Ozempic I am no longer at risk of diabetes. Ten of the 80 pounds I’ve lost I did myself by cutting down on carbs and upping my protein intake. The other 70 were Mounjaro. 
My doctor asked me at my last visit whether I still found pleasure in food; some of his other patients on the drug have told him that they’re sad to have lost the intensity of their joy in eating. I still love a good melty cheeseburger, even if I don’t eat the whole thing anymore. 
I still love the crunch of sunflower seeds on my salad, even if I don’t drown it in dressing. I have at least another 20 pounds to lose to get to my target weight, but it’s unclear how long I can stay on Mounjaro. My insurer has approved my prescription through March 2025. 
After that, only some of my doses will be covered. If I lose all the weight, my doctor has cautioned me, the company may cut me off entirely. I’m not sure what would happen then. Many people who go off GLP-1 medications report regaining the weight. My husband has said that we might be able to scrape together enough money to pay out-of-pocket, but with our daughter getting ready to apply to college soon, that might not be realistic. The only thing I know for certain is that gaining the weight back is not an option. For my health, for my family, I’d have no choice but to go back to white-knuckling it through the day, relying on the “tips and tricks” that were never enough. And that scares me.