What do we REALLY think about the weight loss jabs?

@Stormyrose you wrote earlier

”its done, best folks get comfortable with the fact we have this choice, no one has to take them, but for the millions and millions who do wish to, it’s nothing short of wonderful.”

I don’t know if you mean to, but the above could more accurately say:

“its done, best folks get comfortable with the fact SOME have this choice, no one has to take them, but for the millions and millions who ARE PRESCRIBED OR CAN AFFORD TO BUY PRIVATELY, it’s nothing short of wonderful.”

Definitely the haves and have nots for WLIs.

I'm not sure boredom levels have changed since the 40s and 50's. Arguably people had just as boring jobs in the 40s and 50s as now- possibly more so. What's changed is that now when you're bored at work there's a costa next door, a vending machine in the pantry and a Tesco over the road, whereas you used to be in a field/ mine/factory with no prospect of any food other than at meal breaks and what you brought with you/ was getting served in the canteen. I think these parameters helped people compartmentalise food a lot better.

This may be true but also food noise is partly boredom. We are miserable as a species in the social and economic environment we’re stuck in: food is a comfort, that’s why we crave it.
Obesity is about far more than food.

You’re embarrassing yourself

The poster also mentions ‘the sheer safety’ of WLI’s, which is not correct. They have side effects and some are unpleasant. The long term effects of the drugs still aren’t known and it’s for that reason that they’re only prescribed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity - because the risks of these conditions outweigh the potential risk of taking WLI’s.

Very safe and beneficial for people with diabetes, obesity or insulin resistance. The benefits massively outweigh the risks. For people of normal BMI with no risk factors for cardiovascular disease the risks outweigh the benefits. So many people are getting them off label and microdosing and we don’t know what the long term effects of that could be.

Oh so you didn’t say ‘but the evidence of the lack of satiety is in the sheer fact two thirds of the population are over weight or obese’?

The WHO say that global obesity rates are fueled by "obesogenic" environments, including widespread availability and marketing of cheap, energy-dense processed foods, and a steep rise in sedentary lifestyles caused by modern work, urbanisation, and a lack of active transportation options. Do you disagree with that?

What the fuck!

People's diets, as a whole, have changed massively since the 50s. The largest change is fast food, and the most recent change is the dropping of the societal frowning upon of eating in the street (on the buses, on the trains, at the office desk, in the car, and eating effectively 18 hours a day).

Some people can eat like that and not gain weight (but lose health anyway). I said nothing about that being the only cause of obesity. I gain weight with a few extra teaspoons a day of olive oil. But eating UPFs and fast foods, and foods which were occasional foods only for decades after the 50s, is a major reason why socially, worldwide, as a whole, there is an obesity epidemic.

Obesity is terrible for health of course, and it should be prevented. WLIs are part of the solution to obesity. But those health problems affect children and adults who cannot access WLIs, or can’t use them for medical reasons, or for whom they don’t work. I don’t understand why you’re so disinterested in preventing obesity, and so keen for people to just become obese, have all the problems that causes and then take drugs for the rest of their lives. Do you think the same about other drugs? Shall we legalise heroin because, if it gets out of control we can pop people on methadone?

That’s an idea only you have put forward, not one poster has said such a thing.

Ok this shows such a lack of knowledge on obesity you should be embarssed to even be part of this conversation and have shown yourself up,

obesity is not in the main due to greed and poor diet as you imagine. Slurping smoothies, eating fatty burgers etc.

go and educate yourself.

I am a couple of stone overweight (about 12 stone) and I took Wegovy for a few months last year. It worked but made me feel rough and it didn’t change my eating habits. I chose to come off and the weight came back off. I am trying hard to be done with yo-yo dieting and trying just to eat well and move more.

I think the jabs 100% are really good. If I was morbidly obese I would rather be thinner, be able to walk, run, do things with my kids etc. Feeling a bit shit would be worth it. I know I’m only a stone or so away from not feeling huge and I think I can do that myself.

Exactly. For sure some people have metabolic disorders, and for those who have developed metabolic disorders as a result of obesity it’s difficult to change. I do understand why people prefer WLIs over the very slow, boring and difficult process of unravelling a bad diet/lifestyle. But this idea that it’s biologically impossible without WLIs and we should all be absolved of personal responsibility or free of the consequences of our decisions is wild.

Not sure what's so totes hilaire here.

People ate for the very most part home-cooked foods, their diets weren't full of UltraProcessed Frankenfoods, or "edible food substances", and they generally ate three meals a day and few snacks. They certainly weren't walking down the street slurping on a giant smoothie or munching a fast food burger, or getting food high in salt and fat cooked by somebody else delivered to their door daily.

Of course it’s different, but doesn’t mean we can’t adapt the old fashioned values/common sense of eating well and moving of our arses.

Yes, it’s the third or so time I’ve referred specifically to food quality so I thought it was clear, but have clarified for you now.

I’m not confused, I just find it irrelevant to talk about heating as a reason for a rise in obesity. The population was perfectly well fed in the 1960s, arguably eating foods we’d now consider quite unhealthy like dripping, lots of potatoes and fatty cuts of meat. If you want to take lessons from the past then look at the lack of processed food, more time spent outdoors and a less developed sense of individualism.

If you acknowledge I’m not someone who has suggested f2f be compulsory why on earth do you keep saying to me?

Again, there is a huge benefit to society of fewer people being obese, but that benefit could we even better if we prevent obesity, rather than just treat it.

Yes of course the world was different in the 40s and 50s, less cars, more manual labour, no computers, less imports. 😂

The pp is suggesting that obese people are all lacking that hormone, which I don’t believe evidence shows

And what increases that hormone in the gut, anyway? Fruit and vegetables,whole grains, and so on - ie, fibre. People laugh at the idea of changing their diet to include a larger amount of fibrous natural food, while claiming the WLI are helping to "train them how to eat" or somesuch.

there was no such thing as ‘food noise’ in the 40s/50s. People were generally slim as did manual work and ate home cooked food. Obesity was rarely a medical issue.

My late grandparents would be most confused if they were here now to see people injecting themselves to stop being obese.
Sadly our country is a breeding ground for addiction, whether it be junk food, drugs, vapes, too much plastic surgery. None of which do our inside or outside any good.

This thread got a bit silly.

The genie is out the bottle, weight loss drugs are here to stay, they will become easier to get, not harder, cheaper to buy not more expensive, we will not move to a nanny state where food is controlled, and the sheer safety record of the drugs as well as the huge amount of health benefits have proven we don’t need doctors appts in the main.

its done, best folks get comfortable with the fact we have this choice, no one has to take them, but for the millions and millions who do wish to, it’s nothing short of wonderful. It’s a huge advancement in medical science. One of the most important in decades due to the fact obesity is the biggest killer in society and of course the drugs bring many other health benefits, from reduced cancers on.

it is clear to see the people who are taking issue, and it’s a tiny amount of repeat posters, don’t mention the severe health implications of obesity whilst screeching erroneously about gall bladders, they don’t reference the risk of gall stones due to obesity or weight loss. They don’t mention the fact obesity causes 11 different cancers, or the cost to health care systems. There is no balanced discussion, it’s simply stop prescribing or make them harder to get, instead they recommend spending billions on wasting doctors time or a nanny state to control the populations food intake, that’s how desperate they are not to see people slim and healthy , I assume as they struggle.

these drugs are global, not just the uk. And for the poster who bizzarely claimed rhe WHO recommend the drugs to profiteer, I have no words.

Again, you wrote 'stop offering more food than anyone could ever possibly need'. That couldn't possibly happen without massive state control and would be vastly unpopular. If you only mean that we should regulate better, that's fine and I'm not opposed to it, but it most certainly would still mean societies where populations were being constantly offered more food than they needed. That isn't going anywhere.

On the shivering point, I haven't mentioned it as a way to lose weight so this might be where your confusion lies. The reason cold weather is relevant is because, as I mentioned a few posts ago, some people think the fact that in the mid 20th century some wealthy societies had enough resources to feed everyone whilst not having much obesity means it's something that must be possible now. But part of this was people needing more calories to keep warm than they do with better heating systems. So this is a point about the past, not obesity now, once that particular calorie burning need reduced. There aren't any examples of societies that had high obesity rates and then went backwards in widespread heating access.

If you aren't one of the people advocating for compulsory face to face appointments for WLI monitoring, you're not one of the cohort being discussed. A poster upthread was.

Lastly, if we're speculating about potential for WLIs meaning cost to wider society even for those who aren't obese, we must also ensure we mention the potential for them to benefit wider society too.

Yes, thats how the drugs work. The pp is suggesting that obese people are all lacking that hormone, which I don’t believe evidence shows.

You have a pretty dim view of humanity if you think the only way to prevent obesity is to drug us all. 60% of people in the UK are not obese, and that figure is higher in 120 or so countries. Do those people not have monkey brains? But if you do think that, you presumably agree that we should pre-emptively drug everyone, before they become obese?

Are you still upset I quoted this and mentioned it was ironic?

However when it is discussed with a lot of misinformation, people are bound to come in with some facts.

This thread is full, if you actually read it, of people on WLI who are posting incorrect "facts," incorrectly correcting correct facts, refusing to accept the actualities, for example, arguing until they are blue in the face that gallbladder disease is not in any way related to WLI beyond the losing weight fast bit, or that pancreatitis is in any way related to using WLI. These are established facts.

I don’t think I’ve said anywhere that people should be prevented from accessing food. But in case that somehow got lost, let me spell
it out. Governments should regulate food manufacturers better, so that UPFs cease to be the norm. That is not totalitarian, protecting citizens health and safety is the first job of government. UPFs present a huge health risk.

You seem very stuck on this idea of shivering as a way to lose weight. I don’t know how else to say it, but it’s just not true. If it were, Canada, the US and Scotland wouldn’t have the obesity rates they do, would they? Better hearing only matters if people never go outside - and that’s the thing that has a much bigger impact. Poorer people would not be, on average, fatter than wealthier people - or is it that they have really good heating too?

I don’t think I’ve said anyone ‘needs’ a face to face appointment. And I don’t think these drugs necessarily need more scrutiny than others. However they are relatively new and even from the thread there seems to be a mix of understanding of the potential for side effects. That’s for people to decide on their own of course, but it does also have the potential to be very costly to the rest of us - like the cost of smoking, alcohol use and obesity. I’m certainly not advocating for resources to be reallocated to WLIs, if anything I’d advocate for reallocation to prevention.