Is this going to open a floodgate - weight loss jabs for unemployed

@CautiousLurker your post is illuminating.

Suddenly there is a bewildering flood of information on these drugs and we need good science journalism to help us figure them out. Not sensationalist headlines.

@CautiousLurker

I understand this, they are a tool. But for most they won’t be used that way (human nature)

I know quite a bit about thyroid (hashimotos). I spent years working my butt off to lose 100lb+ and reverse insulin resistance.

We will only know the effects of these injections in 10+ years realistically.

Surely the drug is depressing appetite, through the action of hormones?

If you stop taking the drug to depress the appetite and then go back to not controlling your calorie intake, you’ll get fat again.

This shows you (and other posters like you) do not understand how they work - their impact on insulin IS known, that is HOW they work. They control the out of whack insulin response to carbohydrates that many men and women experience - they may be pre-diabetic, have a genetic predisposition to diabetes that means insulin is resistant to carbs, they may have PCOS, hypothyroidism (these two present together in over 70% of incidences), be menopausal.. and so on. ALL of these things are endocrinological dysfunctions that mean that the over simplified calories in/calories expended model is inaccurate and that diet/excercise alone to not work. Note the use of ALONE. People using these medications have dieted/exercised just like successful dieters, often over decades. And for many it worked for a big chunk of that time. Until one day it does not because … menopause, PCOS, Hypothyroidism etc changes in the way it impacts the body as you age.

Thyroid cancer was seen in one rat study, hence the precaution of not prescribing to individuals who have a family history of thyroid cancer. My family has a history of hypothyroidism - all my sisters and I have it, along with PCOS; my 16yo son also has hypothyroidism; and we have all been prescribed Ozempic or mounjaro in the last year to not only find that the same agonising exercise regimes and diet programs that everyone else follows finally work again for us… oh, and our thyroid medication has been reduced (and we’ve come off diabetic medication for PCOS too).

Am sick of the ‘take the jab, the fat melts off and as soon as you stop taking it you’ll regain it’ narrative. A study of 22k ozempic users and 22k mounjaro users showed that 56% dieters kept all/most of the weight off after 12m, compared to 95% of traditional dieters who regained some or all their weight in the same period. In fact less than 26% regained all the weight, making it more than 3.5x more successful for long term weight loss and management. It is successful because it helps recalibrate insulin response long term and because you have to completely change your relationship with food/diet/your body in order to lose the weight and this remains after you titrate of it.

Just as anti depressant medication can be stopped and a return of symptoms avoided, if you do the counselling/lifestyle changes that support recovery, these medications are a tool, not a cure.

If there is no effort or work involved in losing weight, there is no incentive to keep the work you have achieved. 99% of people who take these jabs will gain it back as soon as they stop, but with the unknown side effects of these jabs on insulin/thyroid etc

There is effort involved, even with the drugs. They don't lose the weight for you. They rebalance things like insulin resistence and therefore, bring greater balance to leptin and ghrelin.

85% will gain it back. Not 99%. Still not great statistics but if your obesity is caused by hormonal inbalances then, yes, you need to keep taking the medication to keep those hormones in balance. Weight loss itself has long term (not great) effects on some of the hormones we are talking about. It's not as simple as 'you've done the work now just need to maintain it'. Sadly. But that's the same for lots of medications used to treat chronic problems.

I suspect the government is hoping to replicate the same impact the US has seen - in which obesity, for the first time in decades, is on the decline...

As for this antiquated government with its silly policies..

They might want to look at education and the biggest factor, people having access to cheap affordable fruits, vegetables and real food. People having access to affordable sports and exercise facilities.

Instead they inundate the population with aspartame, pills and now injections. In all, we’re cooked.

This is such a dangerous path to go down.

If there is no effort or work involved in losing weight, there is no incentive to keep the work you have achieved. 99% of people who take these jabs will gain it back as soon as they stop, but with the unknown side effects of these jabs on insulin/thyroid etc

You have to work hard for things that aren’t easy to maintain, and retrain your mind on food and exercise.

Makes you wonder what the agenda is

I think you have nailed it. It is a trial with Eli Lilly. As such it will have to go via ethics committees etc. They may even target NHS staff as these people will be better able to give informed consent, plus there is a large HR department to work out sick leave etc.

What the press is up to is anyone's guess. Same goes for politicians.

Have I missed something? The media appears to have framed this as about the unemployed or selling out to big pharma, when actually it's about a small trial of weight loss drugs with Eli Lilly. Is that a bad thing?
Disclaimer: I don't know enough about weight loss drugs to have much of an opionion either way. I am not on them and unlikely to be on them.

Yes its the cheaper option on the day you have 2 quid in your pocket, but its not the cheaper option overall

(in the case of sausage and mash for one person)

You’re defining a smallish group of people who are living in absolute poverty.

A fridge, a freezer compartment, a cupboard and a stove are hardly unusual.

And why only look at savoury food? It’s an awful lot cheaper to eat fruit than pre-packaged desserts and confectionery.

Absolutely @soupfiend the reality for people living in poverty is that they can’t afford to choose the cheaper option.

Yes I get that, but if we are simply comparing cost of meal, to cost of meal, thats the calculation needed.

These are the other variables that come into it adding complexity but someone, cant remember who was saying that a ready meal is more expensive, others saying no its not, no one can make either claim unless its costed out fully

And of course thats just one meal example, a lasagne, curry, moussaka, fish and chip meal, etc etc, they will all have their own costings and complications.

But if you have got £2 you have to choose to buy something that costs £2, not buy in advance and plan ahead. I’ve always got potatoes and peas in already, I could spend my £2 on the sausages and either feed more people or put the rest of the pack in the freezer (which I also have and can afford to run) but if you’re living in poverty, in temporary accommodation, you probably haven’t got this choice.

I have a few issue with this.

1. Obesity is multifactoral and closely linked to deprivation. You can get rid of the obesity with these jabs which will improve people's health and mobility but does it make them more employable? Is part of the reason they were obese because they were trapped in low paid jobs or unable to get one due to lack of skills/education? Is this part going to be addressed?

1. There are many obese people in work - including in the NHS. It would be nice to see those in work actually given access to these jabs to keep them in work and healthy and then it would be an incentive to get a job that facilitated access to this level of healthcare.

3.Thousands of people are currently eligible for these jabs on the NHS due to BMI and related diseases. I believe only hundreds have been actually started on them - is this due to capacity? Do we have the ability to assess, monitor and prescribe these medications in a continuous way?

4.Are we doing this forever? What happens when it stops?

It does seem like a vicious circle of money making - processed food causes illnesses, but instead of addressing that big pharma create drugs to treat one of the symptoms (obesity), leaving the other issues like cancer to continue. We have to get people eating real food again or we aren't going to fix this problem (but big companies will continue to profit from ill health).

Yes, it is almost as if there is a connection between the food manufacturers, and the big pharma. Make people sick, and then provide costly solutions. The Government has a lot to answer for the way that food has been allowed to be messed with.

It's not happening. Technically, the ESA regulations say it could happen but the DWP would have to prove that the refusal was unreasonable. Concern over side effects for example would be reasonable. Also, the human rights act around bodily autonomy would come into play. The same reason why people aren't forced to have vaccinations for example.

I'm not aware of any test case where this has happened in the UK but happy to be corrected.

But NONE of this has been suggested at all - lazy fat benefit claimants getting free jabs or being forced to, it literally isn't being suggested but the media have put their spin on it and some MNetters are histrionic over something that they've imagined.

Well if you're going to cost it out, you need to do it per portion

Are you talking about one person?

A whole pack of sausages isnt going to be consumed in that meal, neither is a whole pack of potatoes. A portion of peas needs to be calculated.

Or is the ready meal to serve several people? You need to compare like with like, so same amount of size portion and preferably work it out calorie wise too.

Yes!
Sausage and mash ready meal £2. Microwave and fork needed.
Sausages £2, potatoes £1.50, peas £1. Need grill/ frying pan/ air fryer for sausages, saucepan and masher (maybe a dash of milk and butter and a colander) for the mashed potatoes and another saucepan for the peas.

I think a lot of people are answering this thread on the flawed premise of the OP, which is about joining it with being unemployed. Clearly this was a mistake, or 'mispeak' by either government or the media, or both.

I think you can draw a distinction between patient autonomy in terms of treatment because we all have a choice.

However, access to public benefits is conditioned by the government in many ways. If you refused medical treatment that would otherwise make you fit for work, or means you would have a lesser disability, I think you could do that lawfully.

How does this fit in with autonomy and patient confidentiality? Will acceptance of the jabs be a condition of receiving UC? Sanctions if someone refuses ? Will GPS have to give the information to the DWP whether the patient/claimant agrees or not?

Imagine if the same was being suggested with contraceptive jabs to get people back to work if they’ve had ‘too many ‘ dc ?

Yes but clearly it will come into align for benefits payment. As part of showing you are fit and ready for work, this jab may become a requirement in effect. It’s not the treatment, it’s the effect of refusing treatment and therefore access to benefit which they are looking to change.

Trialling such a system will give them a much better legal justification to do this. Some smart thinking is happening.

Some people have better self-control, some people really enjoy exercise, some people have active jobs, some people hyper-focus on healthy eating.

Let's be honest, most of us probably should move more and eat less.

My BMI is currently hovering at around 23-24, technically not overweight but definitely quite a bit chubbier than I need to be considering I have a very small frame and next to no muscle. I'm very inactive. I could absolutely do more exercise, but I'm a bit lazy. I eat more than I need to and make some unhealthy choices because I really like food. I'm not depressed. I'm not "too poor" to buy healthy food.