Obesity and Ozempic and more (4 Viewers)

[General Malaise]

Every individual should certainly try behavioral modification in earnest, before subjecting themselves to a (potentially lifelong) medication.

But how long should they attempt diet/exercise alone, and not achieve their desired weight loss, before we consider alternative strategies?

What if your obesity makes exercise intolerable, from joint pain, trouble breathing, chest discomfort, etc.?

I understand the reluctance to take meds, but at the same time, it's highly unlikely these medications are more harmful than unmitigated obesity.

Hopefully, this doesn’t end up like covid vaccination, where people fear extremely unlikely side effects more than the more harmful diseases it prevents/treats.

Diet and exercise when done consistently will work almost all the time.

There is no magic bullet.

Eat less….move more.

The drugs are a band aid and if the behavior change does not happen your doomed. There is no cure except diet and exercise. It’s a serious commitment to yourself to change your lifestyle and unwind your sugar addiction, fast food addiction…..it takes a commitment.

Those who are so morbidly obese should start with simple walking and get into a pool and move…..move your muscles in a non impact pool. And you gotta
really commit to strict diet.

My understanding is that with these drugs people are eating materially less. If so, behavior is indeed changing on that front at least.

It is also curtailing people's desire to drink alcohol (and also smoking in some cases) so it really might be more beneficial to societal health than weight loss.

 

[TripItUp]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

 

[General Malaise]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

Well one thing we know for certain is that shaming people for being overweight is 100% effective as a strategy.

 

[Mitchie]

In other news, water is wet.

I don't think it's that obvious. People ask the legit question, "Why when we look at pictures of beaches from the 60's that the people look entirely different than today?"

Mass manufactured food seems to be the answer.

Understanding that seems useful as some people can move back toward making food.

It's not at all obvious. Majority of people don't pay attention to ingredients.

 

[Mitchie]

Maybe the US should take a harder look at food additives that add to obesity.

Aside from added sugar, including high fructose corn syrup, to what are you referring?

Hyper palatable food requires more preservatives to extend shelf life. It isn't a A=B thing but limiting certain preservatives makes or eliminates a lot of the food people get hooked on. The US I imagine leads the consumption of this

Yes. Hari made the statement that the common denominator for obesity was places where pre-packaged "manufactured" food took over.

In other news, water is wet.

This is the disconnect that most have with food in the good ole USA. They don’t want to make hash browns themselves, they want to buy them in the frozen section. One can pick almost any food. Cookies? Too much of a PIA to make them, buy em. Even veggies. Canned or frozen is “easier”. All the packaged food comes with preservatives, sugars, HFCS and other things that you would never add at at home making things yourself. And the secret the pre packed food folks dont want you to know is that it’s not significantly cheaper to buy all the prepackaged stuff. It’s been very successfully marketed that way, but it’s not. It IS more “work” to make your food from scratch.

And the same goes for restaurants. In order to make the food taste better Add more fat salt and sugars. Usually.

Agree with most of what you're saying but if you're just buying packages of frozen fruit and veggies they have no added ingredients.

 

[Willie Neslon]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Misleading packaging is also a major problem. It blows my mind that they allow "vegetable" oil to have a heart healthy check-mark. It would be great if there was a serious federal effort to combat this dishonest packaging. There is baby formula sold in this country where the top two ingredients are corn syrup and sugar but if you look at the packaging you'd think you'd be feeding your child the healthiest formula possible. Some parents don't bother to read these labels and they set their kid up for childhood obesity and a lifetime of health problems.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Maybe the US should take a harder look at food additives that add to obesity.

Aside from added sugar, including high fructose corn syrup, to what are you referring?

Hyper palatable food requires more preservatives to extend shelf life. It isn't a A=B thing but limiting certain preservatives makes or eliminates a lot of the food people get hooked on. The US I imagine leads the consumption of this

Yes. Hari made the statement that the common denominator for obesity was places where pre-packaged "manufactured" food took over.

In other news, water is wet.

This is the disconnect that most have with food in the good ole USA. They don’t want to make hash browns themselves, they want to buy them in the frozen section. One can pick almost any food. Cookies? Too much of a PIA to make them, buy em. Even veggies. Canned or frozen is “easier”. All the packaged food comes with preservatives, sugars, HFCS and other things that you would never add at at home making things yourself. And the secret the pre packed food folks dont want you to know is that it’s not significantly cheaper to buy all the prepackaged stuff. It’s been very successfully marketed that way, but it’s not. It IS more “work” to make your food from scratch.

And the same goes for restaurants. In order to make the food taste better Add more fat salt and sugars. Usually.

Agree with most of what you're saying but if you're just buying packages of frozen fruit and veggies they have no added ingredients.

A lot don’t. You’re correct. I was more referring to canned fruit/veg. Salt and preservatives are the most common.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

Low fat options are also incredibly misleading as a healthier option. They dump in a lot additives to make them taste better. That in turn make them worse for us than the lfull” fat natural product.

 

[Willie Neslon]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

Low fat options are also incredibly misleading as a healthier option. They dump in a lot additives to make them taste better. That in turn make them worse for us than the lfull” fat natural product.

Absolutely. We've been lead to believe pretty much our entire lives that fat is bad for us. It is not. Never buy anything low-fat or fat free.

 

[TLEF316]

Thinking about this for a while......I don't see any chance that our society changes to the point where people start eating healthy and managing their weight the proper way. IMO, the toothpaste is out of the tube and there's no going back. Yeah.....we mostly eliminated the smoking epidemic, but that was a long time ago and you didnt need cigs to survive. People need food, and most people prioritize what tastes good over what is good for them. And I dont see that changing.

- The "big food" lobby will just throw money at lawmakers to prevent any sort of meaningful change that might hinder their efforts to pump us full of bad, addictive crap.
- That stuff tastes better than steamed broccoli, (To most people) so people will just keep eating it.
- Everyone has decided that we can't "shame" anyone for something "outside their control" (which isn't the case for most obese people....some yes....but most could do better if they REALLY wanted to).....so the "you're beautiful at any size" messaging will continue to drive behavior and the public discourse.
- Our society has obviously become more sedintary with less physical stress at work and more screen time. And that will only get worse.

I'm a logical person. I think its sad that so many people are overweight and unhealthy...but at the end of the day (since I'm lucky to not be one of those people...partially due to genetics and partially due to pretty decent eating and exercise habits) I mostly only care about how it affects ME. If giving this people a "magic drug" is cheaper than treating all the health issues that come along with obesity.....go for it.

That being said....I'm not naive. Those "savings" will likely just be passed along to the health insurers as profit (rather than given back to policy holders as cheaper premiums)

The whole situation sucks, but i dont see a good path forward.

 

[Mitchie]

Thinking about this for a while......I don't see any chance that our society changes to the point where people start eating healthy and managing their weight the proper way. IMO, the toothpaste is out of the tube and there's no going back. Yeah.....we mostly eliminated the smoking epidemic, but that was a long time ago and you didnt need cigs to survive. People need food, and most people prioritize what tastes good over what is good for them. And I dont see that changing.

- The "big food" lobby will just throw money at lawmakers to prevent any sort of meaningful change that might hinder their efforts to pump us full of bad, addictive crap.
- That stuff tastes better than steamed broccoli, (To most people) so people will just keep eating it.
- Everyone has decided that we can't "shame" anyone for something "outside their control" (which isn't the case for most obese people....some yes....but most could do better if they REALLY wanted to).....so the "you're beautiful at any size" messaging will continue to drive behavior and the public discourse.
- Our society has obviously become more sedintary with less physical stress at work and more screen time. And that will only get worse.

I'm a logical person. I think its sad that so many people are overweight and unhealthy...but at the end of the day (since I'm lucky to not be one of those people...partially due to genetics and partially due to pretty decent eating and exercise habits) I mostly only care about how it affects ME. If giving this people a "magic drug" is cheaper than treating all the health issues that come along with obesity.....go for it.

That being said....I'm not naive. Those "savings" will likely just be passed along to the health insurers as profit (rather than given back to policy holders as cheaper premiums)

The whole situation sucks, but i dont see a good path forward.

I really believe it's a massive misconception that healthy food doesn't taste as good. But it often does take more time and effort. I think the problem is multi-factored, a few big ones are fiirst, the food companies get to the kids at a young age when taste is formed with sugary cereals, soda and plenty of other things. Changing dietary habits can be hard, sometimes people do it if there's a life event such as illness. Also healthier food is usually more expensive, understand many families can't afford to buy fresh fruits & veggies rather than a hot dog or mac& cheese. People are strapped for time and combined with laziness don't like to spend time cooking and would rather serve their family a frozen pizza. I think there's ways to overcome these things while not completely in some cases but to some degree.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Thinking about this for a while......I don't see any chance that our society changes to the point where people start eating healthy and managing their weight the proper way. IMO, the toothpaste is out of the tube and there's no going back. Yeah.....we mostly eliminated the smoking epidemic, but that was a long time ago and you didnt need cigs to survive. People need food, and most people prioritize what tastes good over what is good for them. And I dont see that changing.

- The "big food" lobby will just throw money at lawmakers to prevent any sort of meaningful change that might hinder their efforts to pump us full of bad, addictive crap.
- That stuff tastes better than steamed broccoli, (To most people) so people will just keep eating it.
- Everyone has decided that we can't "shame" anyone for something "outside their control" (which isn't the case for most obese people....some yes....but most could do better if they REALLY wanted to).....so the "you're beautiful at any size" messaging will continue to drive behavior and the public discourse.
- Our society has obviously become more sedintary with less physical stress at work and more screen time. And that will only get worse.

I'm a logical person. I think its sad that so many people are overweight and unhealthy...but at the end of the day (since I'm lucky to not be one of those people...partially due to genetics and partially due to pretty decent eating and exercise habits) I mostly only care about how it affects ME. If giving this people a "magic drug" is cheaper than treating all the health issues that come along with obesity.....go for it.

That being said....I'm not naive. Those "savings" will likely just be passed along to the health insurers as profit (rather than given back to policy holders as cheaper premiums)

The whole situation sucks, but i dont see a good path forward.

I really believe it's a massive misconception that healthy food doesn't taste as good. But it often does take more time and effort. I think the problem is multi-factored, a few big ones are fiirst, the food companies get to the kids at a young age when taste is formed with sugary cereals, soda and plenty of other things. Changing dietary habits can be hard, sometimes people do it if there's a life event such as illness. Also healthier food is usually more expensive, understand many families can't afford to buy fresh fruits & veggies rather than a hot dog or mac& cheese. People are strapped for time and combined with laziness don't like to spend time cooking and would rather serve their family a frozen pizza. I think there's ways to overcome these things while not completely in some cases but to some degree.

I mostly agree. But the cost difference isn’t that high.

 

[massraider]

Well one thing we know for certain is that shaming people for being overweight is 100% effective as a strategy.

Clearly not. But people are dancing around this fact, which no one likes:

It's a disease, an addiction, like drugs and alcohol. Sugar is no joke. Agreed. But with THIS addiction, people aren't interested in treatment. The discussion ends at not fat shaming.

Whereas, with drugs or alcohol abuse, the next step, beyond acceptance as an addiction, is treatment. People are not interested in treatment for obesity--Not interested in encouraging treatment. There's no interventions, which everyone encourages with every other addiction.

Nope, with this addiction, we are all about societal acceptance, and look at these role models over here who are obese, and personal acceptance.

That's all healthy, from a mental health standpoint, and I do not dismiss any of that. But there's no heroin addicts that we all hold up as a shining example of an addict who is healthy in their own body. We don't make celebrities out of them.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

One thing that goes overlooked here is that our work/life balance is pretty crappy here, and when things have to be cut from the week exercise is the easiest to cut.

• work
• adequate sleep (which can also affect obesity)
• time with family
• exercise
• general downtime (winding down with a book or a show after the kids are in bed, etc)

Most people in this country have to pick 3 from this list. Maybe 4. It takes real commitment to put adequate time into all 5 here.

Obviously that's not the end-all/be-all as their are other high work rate countries like Japan and China that have low obesity rates, and obviously we have other major issues like food quality and a car-centric society instead of a walking society, but those latter two just make the exercise even more important for us, which is usually the first thing to get cut from that list when we have to make cuts.

I remember before I left my high-stress high hours computer engineering job I was trying really hard to stay in shape (and doing reasonably well at it, but it was hard work to fit it in). I was trying to research whether I would be better off sacrificing sleep or exercise on weeks/days where I didn't have time for both (most of the time). I was going to post on reddit about it but I decided to search first, and sure enough there were already a plethora of discussions about it. People clearly having to make the same decision. I was good about exercising back then, but I rarely slept more than 5-6 hours a night to fit it in so I'm not sure what kind of long-term damage I did to myself and if it was worth it.

Obviously with more time some people would just use that for more Netflix or videogames but we can see what I'm referencing pretty clearly as obesity rates spike HEAVILY when people enter the workforce.

This was specific to Wisconsin (couldn't find it nationally broken down by these age ranges) but obesity rates were...

22% at college age (18-24)
36% at young professional age (25 to 34)
44% at peak money making age (35 to 44)

Obviously there are other things at play like our metabolism slowing down as we age, so obviously 18 year olds are less likely to be obese than 44 year olds, but I doubt there's a substantial difference in metabolism of 22 year olds to 26 year olds to account for a more than 50% increase in the likelihood of being obese. The obvious difference in that small age range is that your free time decreases significantly from 22 to 26.

Tying this back into the 32 hour workweek thread, this is just another way in which Americans are sacrificing their own health and happiness to drag out that those last few hours of low productivity working hours to increase corporate margins by a tiny percent.

But my 401k is kicking butt. So thanks, fatties!

 

[General Malaise]

Well one thing we know for certain is that shaming people for being overweight is 100% effective as a strategy.

Clearly not. But people are dancing around this fact, which no one likes:

It's a disease, an addiction, like drugs and alcohol. Sugar is no joke. Agreed. But with THIS addiction, people aren't interested in treatment. The discussion ends at not fat shaming.

Whereas, with drugs or alcohol abuse, the next step, beyond acceptance as an addiction, is treatment. People are not interested in treatment for obesity--Not interested in encouraging treatment. There's no interventions, which everyone encourages with every other addiction.

Nope, with this addiction, we are all about societal acceptance, and look at these role models over here who are obese, and personal acceptance.

That's all healthy, from a mental health standpoint, and I do not dismiss any of that. But there's no heroin addicts that we all hold up as a shining example of an addict who is healthy in their own body. We don't make celebrities out of them.

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

 

[massraider]

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

Come on.

 

[General Malaise]

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

Come on.

Come on what? You took the comparison to heroin addicts.

And I also disagree with your conclusion about lionizing heroin addicts. Have you heard of rock and roll? There's a lot of heroin addicts we pay money to go see and wear their shirts.

 

[Kev4029]

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

Come on.

That is obviously the big delineator between addictions we put up with from a societal perspective and those we don't.

There is a societal cost to obesity, but it's not immediate nor does it affect people around them to the same level. And once it does get to the point that obesity is a huge burden on those around them, things like interventions are a thing and society generally does get very judgmental at some point.

 

[massraider]

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

Come on.

Come on what? You took the comparison to heroin addicts.

And I also disagree with your conclusion about lionizing heroin addicts. Have you heard of rock and roll? There's a lot of heroin addicts we pay money to go see and wear their shirts.

There are functional addicts. Drug and alcohol, walking around, getting stuff done. Making more money than you or I. And you KNOW the difference between someone making Lizzo a role model, and Keith Richards. Parents don't tell their junkie kids to be Keith Richards. But overweight celebs and overweight kids? All the time.

Fat celebs lose weight, and get called out by people, like they betrayed the tribe or something.

There is a societal cost to obesity, but it's not immediate nor does it affect people around them to the same level. And once it does get to the point that obesity is a huge burden on those around them, things like interventions are a thing and society generally does get very judgmental at some point.

Even if I agreed with this 100%, which I don't, the point stands.

We don't treat obesity like other addictions, from a community perspective. It's waaay too easy to be this particular kind of addict.

I assume the reason is safety in numbers. There are less people who can relate to drug and alcohol addictions, but the obesity thing hits close to home.

 

[AAABatteries]

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

It’s extremely difficult - what I think you mean is that it’s simple. Two different things.

 

[culdeus]

You can function and be a productive person with obesity. You know any functional heroin addicts?

Come on.

Come on what? You took the comparison to heroin addicts.

And I also disagree with your conclusion about lionizing heroin addicts. Have you heard of rock and roll? There's a lot of heroin addicts we pay money to go see and wear their shirts.

There are functional addicts. Drug and alcohol, walking around, getting stuff done. Making more money than you or I. And you KNOW the difference between someone making Lizzo a role model, and Keith Richards. Parents don't tell their junkie kids to be Keith Richards. But overweight celebs and overweight kids? All the time.

Fat celebs lose weight, and get called out by people, like they betrayed the tribe or something.

There is a societal cost to obesity, but it's not immediate nor does it affect people around them to the same level. And once it does get to the point that obesity is a huge burden on those around them, things like interventions are a thing and society generally does get very judgmental at some point.

Even if I agreed with this 100%, which I don't, the point stands.

We don't treat obesity like other addictions, from a community perspective. It's waaay too easy to be this particular kind of addict.

I assume the reason is safety in numbers. There are less people who can relate to drug and alcohol addictions, but the obesity thing hits close to home.

The Kelly Clarkson reaction was nuts. And I never bothered to figure out how she did it. And don't care.

 

[massraider]

The Kelly Clarkson reaction was nuts. And I never bothered to figure out how she did it. And don't care

Adele.
Adele caught **** for losing weight.

 

[Joe Bryant]

In other news, water is wet.

I don't think it's that obvious. People ask the legit question, "Why when we look at pictures of beaches from the 60's that the people look entirely different than today?"

Mass manufactured food seems to be the answer.

Understanding that seems useful as some people can move back toward making food.

Respectfully, I disagree. That’s like saying people don’t know that fast food isn’t that good for you. It’s not as obvious, but I think people know that home made food is healthier.

Example: home made Mac and and cheese is better for you than that neon orange poison sold in a box. I’d say that people are aware but choose to look the other way for convenience, ease, they’re used to it, and they think it’s way cheaper. And they’ve trained their bodies to crave the junk which is tough to change. Which is one reason why these drugs are so popular for those looking to just lose some weight. No work involved.

It’s not easy to make changes.

No worries. We can disagree there. I think it should be obvious to people that pre packaged food (much of it marketed as being more healthy) is a problem. But for many, it's not obvious. Or at least way less obvious than a "water is wet" thing.

in my opinion, it seems the right thing forward is helping educate folks. Not assuming everyone should know it. But that's just how I see it.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It is also curtailing people's desire to drink alcohol (and also smoking in some cases) so it really might be more beneficial to societal health than weight loss.

Yes. That's an exciting potential area.

 

[Joe Bryant]

In other news, water is wet.

I don't think it's that obvious. People ask the legit question, "Why when we look at pictures of beaches from the 60's that the people look entirely different than today?"

Mass manufactured food seems to be the answer.

Understanding that seems useful as some people can move back toward making food.

It's not at all obvious. Majority of people don't pay attention to ingredients.

Thank you.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Well one thing we know for certain is that shaming people for being overweight is 100% effective as a strategy.

Clearly not. But people are dancing around this fact, which no one likes:

It's a disease, an addiction, like drugs and alcohol. Sugar is no joke. Agreed. But with THIS addiction, people aren't interested in treatment. The discussion ends at not fat shaming.

Whereas, with drugs or alcohol abuse, the next step, beyond acceptance as an addiction, is treatment. People are not interested in treatment for obesity--Not interested in encouraging treatment. There's no interventions, which everyone encourages with every other addiction.

Nope, with this addiction, we are all about societal acceptance, and look at these role models over here who are obese, and personal acceptance.

That's all healthy, from a mental health standpoint, and I do not dismiss any of that. But there's no heroin addicts that we all hold up as a shining example of an addict who is healthy in their own body. We don't make celebrities out of them.

This can be a whole different and maybe useful discussion.

"Fat Shaming" is a term quickly brought up. Often with the goal of shutting down discussion.

It may be naive, but I'd hope one can talk about how it might be more healthy to not be obese without "shame" being invoked.

 

[northern exposure]

It's amazing that this thread has managed to attract a lot of posters that are in peak physical condition that haven't gained any weight since high school. All the washboard abs and sculpted physiques are intimidating to a mere mortal like myself.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Maybe the US should take a harder look at food additives that add to obesity.

Aside from added sugar, including high fructose corn syrup, to what are you referring?

Wouldn’t some of the genetic food processing add to the problem also? I could be off base on this. Other countries disallow itt.

Unknown, but unlikely imo.

 

[bigbottom]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

 

[bigbottom]

The Kelly Clarkson reaction was nuts. And I never bothered to figure out how she did it. And don't care

Adele.
Adele caught **** for losing weight.

Yeah, I think it’s a very small minority who have this reaction, but they are admittedly vocal.

 

[belljr]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Lol well put.

Hey we have this drug that curbs your appetite and helps you eat less....

Fn cheaters just eat less.....

 

[massraider]

Yeah, I think it’s a very small minority who have this reaction, but they are admittedly vocal.

Probably. This is also true of most things online, right? Vocal minority.

But we don't see addicts giving celebs a hard time when they kick drugs.

 

[eoMMan]

Keep in mind that this drug does treat type 2 diabetes. (It’s original purpose). Yes, it helps people lose weight as well.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's amazing that this thread has managed to attract a lot of posters that are in peak physical condition that haven't gained any weight since high school. All the washboard abs and sculpted physiques are intimidating to a mere mortal like myself.

who are all the posters you're talking about and can you link the posts where they said this?

 

[Joe Bryant]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

 

[culdeus]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

 

[Joe Bryant]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

 

[bigbottom]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

 

[Joe Bryant]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

Yes. The scarcity thing is big too. At least for now. They talk about how it was all rich people at the Hollywood party crowd early on. And in my experience, I've for sure seen privilege and connection come into play. But like with everything, money will drive things and they'll figure out how to make this available to tons more people. I've heard about spas doing knock off "compounds" already.

Hims just launched an option that I'm sure will crush. https://www.inc.com/sydney-sladovnik/hims-just-launched-an-ozempic-dupe.html

 

[johnnycakes]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

Yes. The scarcity thing is big too. At least for now. They talk about how it was all rich people at the Hollywood party crowd early on. And in my experience, I've for sure seen privilege and connection come into play. But like with everything, money will drive things and they'll figure out how to make this available to tons more people. I've heard about spas doing knock off "compounds" already.

Hims just launched an option that I'm sure will crush. https://www.inc.com/sydney-sladovnik/hims-just-launched-an-ozempic-dupe.html

Here is the text of a message I got from UC Health (University of Colorado), where my doctor(s) are located:

Greetings Johnnycakes,

Our records show you have a current prescription for a GLP-1 medication (brand names for these include Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Tulicity or Zepbound).

There is a nationwide shortage of these medications right now. Until this shortage is fixed, it may take longer than usual to fill your prescription at a UCHealth pharmacy or another pharmacy in our community.

We also wanted to let you know that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently sent out a warning about getting these medications online, at wellness spas, or from pharmacies that are not state-licensed.

According to the FDA, compounded versions of these medications have not been approved.
The best way to make sure you are using safe and effective medicine is to get it from a state-licensed pharmacy.

If you have any questions, please call your pharmacy for more information.

Thank you,
Your UCHealth care team

 

[northern exposure]

It's amazing that this thread has managed to attract a lot of posters that are in peak physical condition that haven't gained any weight since high school. All the washboard abs and sculpted physiques are intimidating to a mere mortal like myself.

who are all the posters you're talking about and can you link the posts where they said this?

It's sarcasm Joe. There are posters in here that are stating how simple it is to lose weight i.e. eat less, move more or a variation of this. There was also the "water is wet" comment. Others have stated people want to take the drug just so they can just keep shoveling food in their mouth (or words to that effect).

They aren't taking into account the differences in metabolism between people. Also, some people feel bad/terrible about themselves due to trauma, depression, etc. So they turn to alcohol or drugs to numb the pain. Others use food. I have a friend that struggles with his weight. He's bi-polar and says sometimes only comfort food (in addition to meds) brings him out of the dark times.
My point is sometimes we don't know what somebody else is dealing with. Just offering a simplistic "eat less,move more = lose weight" isn't helpful.

 

[Joe Bryant]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

Yes. The scarcity thing is big too. At least for now. They talk about how it was all rich people at the Hollywood party crowd early on. And in my experience, I've for sure seen privilege and connection come into play. But like with everything, money will drive things and they'll figure out how to make this available to tons more people. I've heard about spas doing knock off "compounds" already.

Hims just launched an option that I'm sure will crush. https://www.inc.com/sydney-sladovnik/hims-just-launched-an-ozempic-dupe.html

Here is the text of a message I got from UC Health (University of Colorado), where my doctor(s) are located:

Greetings Johnnycakes,

Our records show you have a current prescription for a GLP-1 medication (brand names for these include Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Tulicity or Zepbound).

There is a nationwide shortage of these medications right now. Until this shortage is fixed, it may take longer than usual to fill your prescription at a UCHealth pharmacy or another pharmacy in our community.

We also wanted to let you know that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently sent out a warning about getting these medications online, at wellness spas, or from pharmacies that are not state-licensed.

According to the FDA, compounded versions of these medications have not been approved.
The best way to make sure you are using safe and effective medicine is to get it from a state-licensed pharmacy.

If you have any questions, please call your pharmacy for more information.

Thank you,
Your UCHealth care team

I hope you're able to get the medicine you need there GB.

As far as ramping up production to meet demand, I can't think of many things I have more faith in than I do the US Pharmaceutical Industry's ability to solve production problems so they can increase revenue.

 

[culdeus]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

Yes. The scarcity thing is big too. At least for now. They talk about how it was all rich people at the Hollywood party crowd early on. And in my experience, I've for sure seen privilege and connection come into play. But like with everything, money will drive things and they'll figure out how to make this available to tons more people. I've heard about spas doing knock off "compounds" already.

Hims just launched an option that I'm sure will crush. https://www.inc.com/sydney-sladovnik/hims-just-launched-an-ozempic-dupe.html

Here is the text of a message I got from UC Health (University of Colorado), where my doctor(s) are located:

Greetings Johnnycakes,

Our records show you have a current prescription for a GLP-1 medication (brand names for these include Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Tulicity or Zepbound).

There is a nationwide shortage of these medications right now. Until this shortage is fixed, it may take longer than usual to fill your prescription at a UCHealth pharmacy or another pharmacy in our community.

We also wanted to let you know that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently sent out a warning about getting these medications online, at wellness spas, or from pharmacies that are not state-licensed.

According to the FDA, compounded versions of these medications have not been approved.
The best way to make sure you are using safe and effective medicine is to get it from a state-licensed pharmacy.

If you have any questions, please call your pharmacy for more information.

Thank you,
Your UCHealth care team

Shortages of this and insulin

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

You are perhaps thinking of thalidomide, but that wasn't a weight loss drug. Ozempic is not prescribed for those pregnant or wishing to be pregnant.

 

[johnnycakes]

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

Yes, side effects are certainly a concern. Drug scarcity for those who need it for more serious issues is another. I don’t have a hard time understanding folks who raise those concerns.

Yes. The scarcity thing is big too. At least for now. They talk about how it was all rich people at the Hollywood party crowd early on. And in my experience, I've for sure seen privilege and connection come into play. But like with everything, money will drive things and they'll figure out how to make this available to tons more people. I've heard about spas doing knock off "compounds" already.

Hims just launched an option that I'm sure will crush. https://www.inc.com/sydney-sladovnik/hims-just-launched-an-ozempic-dupe.html

Here is the text of a message I got from UC Health (University of Colorado), where my doctor(s) are located:

Greetings Johnnycakes,

Our records show you have a current prescription for a GLP-1 medication (brand names for these include Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Tulicity or Zepbound).

There is a nationwide shortage of these medications right now. Until this shortage is fixed, it may take longer than usual to fill your prescription at a UCHealth pharmacy or another pharmacy in our community.

We also wanted to let you know that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently sent out a warning about getting these medications online, at wellness spas, or from pharmacies that are not state-licensed.

According to the FDA, compounded versions of these medications have not been approved.
The best way to make sure you are using safe and effective medicine is to get it from a state-licensed pharmacy.

If you have any questions, please call your pharmacy for more information.

Thank you,
Your UCHealth care team

Shortages of this and insulin

What I have a hard time understanding is folks who say just quit eating so much, but then for some reason seem to be reflexively against the idea of a drug that helps people stop eating so much.

Much of the podcast was wrestling with that. I don't know that people are reflexively against it. I think people are questioning if the (potential) risks of a drug are worth it if one was able to do what the drug does (eat less) on their own without the drug.

It would be like if there were a drug one could take that would give you the benefits of walking 10,000 steps per day. One could reasonably argue it might be better to just walk without the drug.

For the podcast, the author Johann Hari has written about how he believes anti-depressant drugs are overprescribed when, in SOME cases, similar benefits to the drug can be obtained without the drug. He talks about feeling hypocritical that he thinks that about antidepressants yet he obtained huge benefits from Ozempic.

I think it's an interesting discussion.

Ephedrine Caffeine stacks had a way of causing a major bump in metabolism. It also caused hearts to spontaneously explode.

Exactly. The side effects are the worry.

I forget the name but the podcast mentioned a weight loss drug years ago that caused tragic birth defects as well.

There's always a concern when it seems like a "magic pill."

You are perhaps thinking of thalidomide, but that wasn't a weight loss drug. Ozempic is not prescribed for those pregnant or wishing to be pregnant.

i said what I mean and mean what I said, chief.

 

[Terminalxylem]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

Low fat options are also incredibly misleading as a healthier option. They dump in a lot additives to make them taste better. That in turn make them worse for us than the lfull” fat natural product.

Absolutely. We've been lead to believe pretty much our entire lives that fat is bad for us. It is not. Never buy anything low-fat or fat free.

Not entirely true. Trans fats are quite bad, and omega 6 fatty acids in high amounts also arent good. But something like skim milk isn’t inherently unhealthy, and its arguably better for you than whole milk.

But ultraprocessed foods which replace fat with food science additives and petrochemicals aren’t healthy, for sure.

 

[Willie Neslon]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

Low fat options are also incredibly misleading as a healthier option. They dump in a lot additives to make them taste better. That in turn make them worse for us than the lfull” fat natural product.

Absolutely. We've been lead to believe pretty much our entire lives that fat is bad for us. It is not. Never buy anything low-fat or fat free.

Not entirely true. Trans fats are quite bad, and omega 6 fatty acids in high amounts also arent good. But something like skim milk isn’t inherently unhealthy, and its arguably better for you than whole milk.

But ultraprocessed foods which replace fat with food science additives and petrochemicals aren’t healthy, for sure.

Sure. It goes without saying trans fats are to be avoided. And yes, Omega 3s>Omega 6's. I don't drink much milk but when I do I choose whole milk for a variety of reasons. I was just trying to make a quick point that healthy fats have been vilified our whole lives as being the cause of obesity/heart disease. People would eat butter substitutes that contained seed oils thinking they were heart healthy (and still do). We were told dietary cholesterol in foods like eggs and nuts were the cause of heart disease. To this day people buy processed fat free cheese thinking it's a healthy alternative.

 

[Terminalxylem]

The American obesity epidemic disgusts me.

Sure, there is a small percentage that can't do anything about it, but the rest really is disappointing and frankly embarrassing.

Eat better and exercise, this isn't difficult.

They put chemicals in these foods that make them highly addictive. Next time you're at the grocery store look for "natural flavors" in the ingredients of anything processed. There is nothing natural about these flavors as those are chemicals designed to go right to your brain to get you to crave it again and again. For some, it is very difficult to resist these unhealthy foods because of these chemicals. And of course sugar addiction is a problem too.

Low fat options are also incredibly misleading as a healthier option. They dump in a lot additives to make them taste better. That in turn make them worse for us than the lfull” fat natural product.

Absolutely. We've been lead to believe pretty much our entire lives that fat is bad for us. It is not. Never buy anything low-fat or fat free.

Not entirely true. Trans fats are quite bad, and omega 6 fatty acids in high amounts also arent good. But something like skim milk isn’t inherently unhealthy, and its arguably better for you than whole milk.

But ultraprocessed foods which replace fat with food science additives and petrochemicals aren’t healthy, for sure.

Sure. It goes without saying trans fats are to be avoided. And yes, Omega 3s>Omega 6's. I don't drink much milk but when I do I choose whole milk for a variety of reasons. I was just trying to make a quick point that healthy fats have been vilified our whole lives as being the cause of obesity/heart disease. People would eat butter substitutes that contained seed oils thinking they were heart healthy (and still do). We were told dietary cholesterol in foods like eggs and nuts were the cause of heart disease. To this day people buy processed fat free cheese thinking it's a healthy alternative.

And I’ll offer the counterpoint that some people are using confusion over fats, along with demonization of carbohydrates, as carte blanche to eat a bunch of calorically dense animal products.

Those things may be healthier than ultraprocessed foods, but they certainly aren’t healthy.

 

[Joe Bryant]

You are perhaps thinking of thalidomide, but that wasn't a weight loss drug.

Sorry, wasn't being specific for weight loss drugs. Thalidomide was a drug widely prescribed to treat nausea in pregnant women and had tragic side effects.

The balance for all drugs is always weighing out the potential side effects vs the good they can do. That's a balance and consideration regardless of what issue the drug is meant to treat.

In the time Ozempic has been prescribed, there doesn't seem to be an issue like that. But I think it's reasonable that people consider and weigh potential risks.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's amazing that this thread has managed to attract a lot of posters that are in peak physical condition that haven't gained any weight since high school. All the washboard abs and sculpted physiques are intimidating to a mere mortal like myself.

who are all the posters you're talking about and can you link the posts where they said this?

It's sarcasm Joe. There are posters in here that are stating how simple it is to lose weight i.e. eat less, move more or a variation of this. There was also the "water is wet" comment. Others have stated people want to take the drug just so they can just keep shoveling food in their mouth (or words to that effect).

They aren't taking into account the differences in metabolism between people. Also, some people feel bad/terrible about themselves due to trauma, depression, etc. So they turn to alcohol or drugs to numb the pain. Others use food. I have a friend that struggles with his weight. He's bi-polar and says sometimes only comfort food (in addition to meds) brings him out of the dark times.
My point is sometimes we don't know what somebody else is dealing with. Just offering a simplistic "eat less,move more = lose weight" isn't helpful.

You'd probably enjoy the podcast then. He talks about those things and how some people do use food for a comfort thing and removing that has issues of its own. He also talks about he lost a ton of weight as he kept eating the unhealthy food after he was on Ozempic, just less of it. But that the goal is eating healthier food.

It's an interesting discussion I think.