to feel uneasy about what this means long term rather than surprised by the weight regain itself?

My guess is that the muscle loss is directly related to rapid weight loss, the glp1s are an especially effective way to facilitate that rapid weight loss.

This.

It’s curtain twitching at its finest isn’t it. I have made an educated decision on my health, it is supported by my gp; why any random thinks their views are relevant to anyone on them, when they themselves are not, either as not eligible or can’t afford and feel duty bound to obsessively post negative comments Just in case we are not just fat but also stupid beats me,

well it doesn’t; and I would be interested if the op and her fan girl posted something relevant, but everything they post is either totally unbalanced, or in relation to wider weight loss.

there is no comments to the macro benefits,nothing to balance the negativity. Our feedback is you’re not on them, you either don’t want them or can’t get your hands on them, sad for you in the latter case, but unless you post something balanced and remotely interesting, not just havering on about environmental impact, the impact of weight loss in general or listing rare side effects on the leaflets then we have a discussion.

everything else is spitting in the wind.

indeed. But all this stuff is only relevant to the people weighing up whether the risk is worth the outcome for them. If you are, as the OP seems to be, someone who does not want to use WLI's themselves, which again, fine I don't choose them either, why are they "uneasy" about the choices of others?

And to me that’s the difference - there’s no logical reason to gain much if your habits and portions have changed by using WLI and you were still eating a fair bit on WLI , and it’s why I don’t think massive suppression for long periods is a great idea - because it’s not changing habits or diet in a long term sustainable way. Yes I have tried them, yes I did lose some purely by the fact I felt nauseous and had heartburn 4 days week so hardly ate, no I’m not on them now and have still lost weight by sticking to the principles, more water, more herbal tea, more protein, far less carb, far more veg and salad and as little sugar as possible - I realise now where I was going wrong before ( and I’m 64) - a lack of consistency that really needed months and months and months and although I ate well quality wise, my evening meals were way too big .

There has been a variety of outcomes found from the results of the GLP1 clinical trials wrt muscle mass lost. The overall conclusion is not yet clear imo, and certainly the advice to eat enough protein and do some exercise is sensible for any weight loss approach. If you are older and already frail then that's particularly important if you are losing weight, with or without GLP1s.

I don't know, but that is what the studies have found.

@velvetgeranium Why would you lose more muscle than on any other diet?

The article linked in the OP is literally about a meta-analysis.

But it's not the worst thing that people can say about WLI. For starters, there are the life-affecting conditions currently listed by the pharmaceutical companies that make them. Gastroparesis, pancreatitis, bowel blockages, gallbladder problems, and acute kidney problems, and ileus, or intestinal paralysis; there is also NAION, sudden and complete vision loss, not yet listed as I understand it.

Obviously, if you are morbidly obese, then the benefits outweigh the risks. But if you (general you) are just sick of dieting to keep your weight down, and you have to stop taking them because you have side effects you find hard to live with or you can't afford them currently, or you are unlucky enough to be one of the people who had a severe adverse effect, then you regain the weight (and have in the meantime lost muscle and bone, which are hard to rebuild when older or unwell) four times faster than if you'd lost it by diet alone. Which is what this thread was supposed to be about.

Perhaps you don't have any side effects to mention, and you are lucky enough to not pick up something from the adverse effect list whilst on them, but you can't afford them currently any more, so you go off them. You've gone off them, regained most of the weight, lost more muscle than people who have gone on regular diets and regained more fat in your body composition, if not on the scale (ie more muscle lost, and more fat regained than regular dieters, as studies have shown). Each time someone goes back on them, and loses some weight again, they have again also lost more muscle and bone than if they'd just dieted...

It's going to take years for the real-world data to come in on the serious adverse effects per thousand of population on them, but having read stories from icu doctors about GLP-1 patients in their twenties having to have a colostomy bag for life after a bowel blockage, I would not want to risk that happening, even if it is one in a thousand or more chance.

This is the thread that keeps on giving, it’s properly making me chuckle especially now the use of the term meta analysis to try to high brow a whinge of we just want to be negative about them please let us. 😂

What constitutes a 'proper' answer? I'd like to be clear on this as I directly answered OPs question in my first post and tried to engage immediately, but I don't know if I'm one of the people you're talking about.

I meant the post immediately preceding mine that asked:

Are you saying that without the WLI, and even with the reduced portion sizes (i .e. the magical “Lifestyle Change” that is discussed very widely), I would gain weight?

People were to busy picking at semantics and flinging accusations at me to engage with her properly. Two posters from the "How dare you discuss a downside to WLI! You are ignorant!" posse did engage with her briefly, later on - but nobody, despite insistences that only the fully informed should be allowed to discuss WLI, really had a proper answer for her - despite allegedly understanding the meta-analysis and its implications and what it really means in real terms.

If the worst thing people can say about WLI is that most patients are dependent on them to keep a health problem at bay... that's not too bad at all.

'derail the discussion'

lol!!!

What discussion.

OP's petty pouting gaslighting, is that a discussion? Snide comments, only replying to hangers on? Telling people to leave the thread!!!

Each 'point' OP makes has wider context, doesnt like being informed of that at all, doesnt like being given information. Calls it being 'shut down'

Oh well.

There is still hope! Only 650 posts down and 6 days in, there's loads of space for OP to get a bit more granular and flesh out her points for us.

I for one have total faith that she's going to expand on what sort of obesity cures she thinks might be viable, engage with the explanations people have given of the BBC article. One of these days. It would be massively cynical to think she's just going to keep typing short, content lite replies to posts about shit stirring.

You still don’t have anything to say on the subject of the thread you started. You’ve agreed with some posters who’ve said mildly negative things about WLI but had wilfully ignored any questions aimed at you by others. I suspect you and the other main negative voice on this thread are probably the same person. Why don’t you find a better hobby?! This is just sad…

But posters have engaged. Myself and others have explained that the BBC article doesn’t mean what the OP thinks it does. We have explained the physiology of weightloss and why regain is a risk -whichever method is used. We have given reasons why some people choose to remain on GLP long term and why this can benefit their health. We have shared our personal experiences of improved health, and challenged the inconsistent attitudes to obesity and overweight compared with other long term conditions .

But instead of responses to our replies, debating the evidence and our points, we have had whataboutery and accusations of trying to shut down the debate.

You haven’t engaged in any meaningful discussion on this thread. As well you know.

Perhaps you missed my response, where I explained that far from saying you shouldn't speak, I tried to engage you further yesterday to discuss a point you made in more depth. But I didn't get a reply. Can't do exchange by myself!

I am doing the same

i honestly don’t understand where the assumption (not on this thread) comes from that the 2nd you stop taking the drug the weight piles on

i am in a calorie deficit, i am trying to maintain and slightly up my calorie intake and I go to the gym….I don’t mind putting on a wee bit of weight while it all settles in

hopefully i can retrain my body to realise that about this weight is ‘right’ for me…i do think my body is fairly stupid though so maybe not 😀

You are in for a jolly long wait

Despite assurances from some, no there’s no magic wand that makes someone gain weight as soon as they stop WLI. If you’ve made lifestyle changes and stick to maintenance calories, there’s no reason why you should put the weight back on.