My primary doctor's advice 4 years ago.
"You lost the genetic lottery and I'm putting you on Ozempic to address your metabolic disorder"
My endocrinologist's response 2 years and 50lbs of weight loss ago. Since then every health marker has improved substantially, and with it clarity of thought and energy. Broad insurance coverage for these medications should be a slam dunk for insurers.
“ most common Ozempic side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain and constipation. Serious Ozempic side effects include allergic reactions, changes in vision and pancreatitis. Ozempic has an FDA boxed warning for the risk of thyroid C-cell tumors.”
But to be clear, these drugs are already approved by the FDA for diabetes, so they've been studied heavily already for safety. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe diabetic people were intended to take this medication long-term. So it would have been studied and assessed for safety in that regime.
Really we're just waiting for studies specifically designed to measure efficacy on weight loss, and for the FDA to assess the specific risk-benefit balance of prescribing this medicine for weightloss. Seeing as how obesity is one of the leading causes of death in modern society, I wouldn't be surprised if the FDA is already leaning towards approving it if it passes efficacy. Which it most likely will; the diabetes studies reported something like 9 in 10 people losing something like 10-20% of their bodyweight? The signal was huge.
[1] not making light of anorexia. I mindfully chose that description because that drug will induce disordered eating patterns. I still have days where I refuse to eat because to my BG level and suppress hunger then binge because the hunger is overwhelming.
The opioid crisis has taught me that some doctors will put you on drugs without a care in the world to the consequences. Not that hard to find one who will tell you what you want to hear.
Look at this thread. Everyone taking these drugs has some metabolic condition?
Perfectly reasonable, and I bet this drug has been a boon.
My sibling, who has an addictive personality trait, required bariatric surgery after attempting for years to lose the weight (~120lbs overweight). Their doctor told them if they didn't lose the weight, it was going to kill them. Post surgery, they are in the best shape of their life. Insurance covered it, because they demonstrated they attempted all other options first. They simply can no longer overeat now due to the plumbing update.
But sure, laziness. Feelings over data. Shockingly common.
(these drugs were in clinical trials at the time their surgery was scheduled, and were inaccessible to them)
What point do you think you're proving here? Your sibling, with some rare condition, is anecdata.
Do you honestly think this is the common use case for Ozempic? Maybe you should try looking at the data. America has an obesity problem, and it isn't because there's widespread metabolic conditions. People eat too much and move too little. The use of this drug is 90% cosmetic. And, as I said, have at it. Elon using this drug was one of the first times I'd heard of it. Metabolic condition, of course.
This is no different than half the population having ADHD and being on stimulants. Or Quaaludes. Or whatever. It happens over and over.
I absolutely believe these drugs are a solution for genetic predisposition and a society that has engineered people into unhealthy lifestyles. Remember this comment when the next Pepsi semi trailer rolls by.
> This is no different than half the population having ADHD and being on stimulants. Or Quaaludes. Or whatever. It happens over and over.
I think we have different ideas of genetics and brain chemistry leading to outcomes.
I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I have no idea what was wrong with your sibling. But if you're telling me that they had a controlled diet and exercised and still became obese enough that it put their life at risk, I'd say that's a rare condition, yes. Do you think that is 41% of the population? How about 30%? 20%?
>America does have an obesity problem and you think it's willpower. Does that make sense?
Yes, it does make sense.
Dieting (and/or caloric restriction) is harder than not. Exercising is harder than not. I struggle with both myself. This is how the brain works. I'm sort of astounded that this is news to you.
Oh, and if I get to the point where Ozempic is useful to me, I'll take it. But I won't tell people I have a condition.
But I disagree that it’s a willpower problem. It’s a society problem.
I moved from America to Europe and there is little obesity here — because you get daily exercise automatically by walking around (due to good city designs), and toxic food is illegal.
Compared to the standards in America where you walk to your car in the driveway (and that’s the extent of walking that your city provides), and none of the food in the grocery store is actually what the box says (because it’s all chemical imitations).
In Europe, there are no hurdles to overcome because you get good food and exercise automatically just by living there. In America, you can overcome the hurdles with willpower, but you shouldn’t need to in the first place, if society just created a healthier environment.
Grocery stores here are packed with junk, yes. But they also have an abundance of healthy foods. Probably more than any nation on earth.
I don't know if "willpower" is the right term, but it conveys the idea.
In short, it's less mentally costly in Europe to be fit, whereas in the US life is optimized to minimizing healthy activity.
I think it's a myopic take to observe a society-wide increase in obesity and shrug it off to not enough people watching their CICO.
My question to you is this. Is it equally hard for everyone? I'd say no, for some people running (when not being chased) is fun and for others it's a chore. Some people really really like a piece of pie after dinner and some are mildly interested.
If you put some people in a place where they don't technically need to move more then getting up off the couch then they won't. If you can eat all you want some will really eat a lot and others won't.
I think the world we find ourselves in is one where in respect to food and exercise we're limited only by desire. You can say metabolic or whatever but it seems to me some people just have a higher bar to clear - and unless you know what that is for you and them it's hard to begrudge them wanting help.
https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(23)00051... (Habitual daily intake of a sweet and fatty snack modulates reward processing in humans)
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/erv.2878 (Prevalence of food addiction determined by the Yale Food Addiction Scale and associated factors: A systematic review with meta-analysis)
Would you reasonably expect an alcoholic to stick to three drinks a day? Same deal with food in many cases.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-new-weight-...
Mostly though I care about what works. Not obsessing over whether the “true way” would have worked for them as well. Have they achieved their goals? Great, done.
> Just admit that you want a shortcut, there's nothing wrong with that.
If this is so inconsequential and all of that... then why are you obsessing over it? Literally what does it matter, lol? They did something that worked so their work is done. But, what, their next task is to do a confessional about their laziness or whatever to some random strangers?
This is so entitled that it has become farcical.
> Look at this thread. Everyone taking these drugs has some metabolic condition?
Are you surprised that a thread about X has a disproportionate amount of anecdotes about X? Threads on X don't attract a uniform sampling of the population.
Obsessing over it? You asked a question on a forum, I answered it. How do you think this works?
>But, what, their next task is to do a confessional about their laziness or whatever to some random strangers?
You already did that, though.
>Are you surprised that a thread about X has a disproportionate amount of anecdotes about X?
I'm not surprised there are many people in this thread using Ozempic. It's a very popular drug. I am very surprised (and don't believe for a second) that all of these people have metabolic conditions, rather than a lack of willingness to diet.
And, yes, I'm laughing at the fact that you think doctor 1 (no financial gain for his advice) is dumb, but doctor 2 (much financial gain for prescribing the drug) is the one who has it all figured out.
Why are you preoccupied with how someone should “just admit it”? (You don't have to answer that. I'm rephrasing it.)
> You already did that, though.
My confessional is where?
Again, your continued interest in people's supposed character rather than their health outcomes is revealing.
> And, yes, I'm laughing at the fact that you think doctor 1 (no financial gain for his advice) is dumb, but doctor 2 (much financial gain for prescribing the drug) is the one who has it all figured out.
I haven't said that the first doctor is wrong. But I suspect that you have failed at reading user handles...
Do you even know what the words mean that you're using? This is a discussion board for discussing things. I have thousands of comments here.
>Again, your continued interest in people's supposed character rather than their health outcomes is revealing.
You have no idea what the long term consequences are of taking Ozempic. We do know the long term benefits of eating healthy and exercising. I'd say that is caring about health outcomes.
I mean that you have an excessive concern with people's assumed motivations.
By the way, did you learn to read user handles since last time? I see you didn't follow up on your little attempted slights.
> You have no idea what the long term consequences are of taking Ozempic. We do know the long term benefits of eating healthy and exercising. I'd say that is caring about health outcomes.
This is a perfectly legitimate concern. And you did bring that up in your original comment. So I'll just leave it that.
If the answer to any of these questions is in fact yes, then is it possible that some people are hungrier than others?
Can you willpower your way through a job that is easy for others, yes. Can you willpower your way to a better sprinter, yes. Can you willpower your way to a million dollar net worth, yes. Can you willpower your way to eat less, yes again.
But to ignore that some people may need less willpower than others is a position that wreaks of entitlement and ignores the possibility that in so many ways we each are born with different strengths and weaknesses that impact our life. Nobody is denying willpower can help you overcome many obstacles, but if you could take a pill to make you instantly a millionaire, my guess is you would go that route versus willpower any day of the week.
You are vastly underestimating the amount of people who don't believe in silver bullets or miracle pills, and you are certainly showing some (willful?) ignorance of all the history of drugs who got into the market and showed side-effects long after its introduction in the market.
What a silly analogy. If I could take a pill to make me a millionaire, but it substantially increased my chance of a debilitating illness, no I would not take it.
Do you think that taking Ozempic is a free lunch? It might be...but I doubt it.
For some people, hunger might be unmanageable. Ozempic side effects might be trivial to handle for them
This is a nice rhetorical hook to lead with on a forum where most people's identity centers around being smart.
Have you had any side effects?
Also if you could have lost the weight with diet and exercise, do you think you would have still wanted the drug knowing what you know now? I suppose there is a risk here that people will turn to the drug instead of sorting diet / amount of exercise. I think an argument could be made that now we have the drugs we "over prescribe" drugs like SSRIs and stimulants because it's often easier to "fix" the symptoms with drugs rather than address the root cause.
Even if you believe my comparison to SSRIs is inappropriate, I don't think it's controversial to suggest that the pharmaceuticals are often too quickly prescribed in the US. My question is perfectly valid.