to think more negative effects will come out from Ozempic use?

[nameey]

Just read that the 30 year old singer Avery has been diagnosed with osteoporosis due to Ozempic use. Looks like this could be the start of many conditions coming out.

I know Ozempic is incredibly helpful for a lot of people but losing weight but then having osteoporosis does not seem worth it.

AIBU?

The point of the reference to viagra was that it was also available without a face to face consultation (without any consternation from the general public), despite its serious side effects.

Gosh… do try to keep up.

Firstly, I wasn't responding to you. And secondly, it is obvious that when the main criteria for viagra is simply being a man, then there is no need to monitor prescribing in that way.

GLP-1 agonists are not suitable for everybody on the planet.

This was the comment I was replying to.
"I respect your opinion but I don't think the morning after pill or viagra has the same potentially serious side effects for people using them who don't actually need them."
I was just letting that poster know that viagra in particular has some pretty serious side effects.

Speaking to someone in a condescending manner doesn't really make your point and is not really a part of what would be considered healthy debate which is what those on this thread are repeatly requesting.

In terms of novel side effects emerging after decades of use in millions of people I agree this is a concern with any compound. The good thing about repuspoing an existing medication is we have years of this data.which is what has happened with GLP1 agonists.

If it was a new compound that was being used to treat my high blood pressure that was repurposed and would add 10 years to my life would you have the same concern?

Is alot of this thread down to the fact that we don't really perceive obesity to be a disease and more a failing of the individual. There fore as a failing of the individual we don't need a medical intervention?

If we all conceded that a hypothetical side effect that may or may not emerge in decades means we shouldn't take the risk, can anyone offer a non pharmalogical answer to the worldwide obesity pandemic?

I am very partial to prevention but requires a sociatal change, banning or taxing the fuck out of UPF, making car travel difficult / impossible within city's and increasing active travel. Increase in access to sports and sports faculties specifically in lower socioeconomic areas. This would target childhood obesity where it is most prevalent.

But any attempt to implement these changes would face massive backlash. I say that as someone who had the LTN removed from their neighbourhood because of backlash.

Yeah, that’s not how this works - anyone is free to respond to any post.

And no - you don’t just rock up to a pharmacy and get viagra simply because ‘you’re a man’. It is most certainly not suitable for all men (you can’t have it if you’ve got heart problems or have had a stroke, for example). And yet, it’s still available without a face to face consultation. Where’s everyone’s worry for those men who may be getting viagra when it’s not suitable for them?

It’s a bit hard to know what to say. ‘Yes, you’re right, more side effects are likely to come to light the more people use them’? That’s the beginning and end of the thread really. Given that predicting what these might be and how severe they are is beyond pretty much anyone at this point, certainly MN posters who are wedded to Daily Mail ‘science’ articles that get things wrong, there’s not actually a lot more to say. So starting these threads is very repetitive.

Speaking to someone in a condescending manner doesn't really make your point and is not really a part of what would be considered healthy debate which is what those on this thread are repeatly requesting.

Oh, the irony.

Actually it's called constructive feedback and really not dissimilar to advice we give to students when teaching them to debate.

If you feel anything else I have said is condescending please let me know.

Here are some tips on how to debate and common mistakes taken from the first post after googling

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/things-you-should-never-say-do-during-argument-hicks-i0k-plus-

One of the points made is highlighting that sarcasm is not a useful tool and part of debate is actually being open to listening to the other side of the argument.

I agree with aspects of concern regarding prescribing criteria and have agreed that new more uncommon side effects are possible amd likely with an increase population. However I have also highlighted that this drug has been tested for decades in millions of people so from a drug development point of view is one of the safer options.

I have posed the question numerous times as to why society or posters on this thread thinks obesity shouldn't be treated juat in case of side effect?
Things like headaches and erectile dysfunction which are not life threatening and have only a mild impact on quality of life should be treated. Obesity which has a huge impact on both lifespan and quality of life should not. Why?

But GLP-1a aren’t new - they’ve been used since 2005 so that’s 20 years worth of data.

I have posed the question numerous times as to why society or posters on this thread thinks obesity shouldn't be treated juat in case of side effect?

Where has anyone said anything remotely like that?

PS: Your entire post is incredibly condescending and patronising.

OK so if the aim of the post is not to stop people taking WLI what end point do you think should come to this thread?

As others have stated many other drugs are either know to have far more severe side effects or are just as new as this class of drugs but I have never seen a single thread about concern over my new blood pressure mess.

Well, yes of course. But we're all meant to 'Be Kind' nowadays and not state the bleeding obvious, sadly.

There are 52 pages worth of threads on the WLI board. That's approximately 2,600 threads.

Why can't posters discuss elsewhere - for example, here - their thoughts and opinions and questions and even their misgivings about this massive trend?

And yet, even knowing about those very bad reactions NOW, people don’t twice about using those meds….

I mean, it’s pretty obvious that as time goes, we will uncover more about WLI. Some negative. And some positive. There are talks that MJ could help with addiction and Alzheimer’s for example. That’s pretty big. I dint think anyone thinks there the safest medication ever, have no side effects and certainly no side effects we dint know about yet.

What I really don’t agree with is the scaremongering tone of the OP.
And the example that doesn’t actually reflect what is a potentially real issue - that we dint know yet all there is to know about those meds.

But then… it’s also the case with antidepressants or statins that are both at the center of huge controversy. And yet, in those cases, the ‘main stream’ attitude is to say there great/life saving etc….

Which basically takes us back to … it’s a personal choice. Stop judging.

Yes, I thought we were right.

Which basically takes us back to … it’s a personal choice. Stop judging.

It is indeed a personal choice. Exercising some discrimination, or making a different choice to you, or just wanting to discuss a current trend is not judging.

Discussion involves looking at the pros and cons of something not putting forward one side of an argument and refusing to listen to the other side

The ops first post was about the misuse of the drug and made a gigantic leap that the drug is linked to osteoporosis which contradicts the scintific literature. This has been pointed out multiple times.

The follow up argument of "well we just don't know what may happen" is fair of any drug but rarely, if ever raised about other drugs that millions are taking. Long story short is drugs carry risk. This is not a novel concept. However the longer a drug is around the more we understand the risk.

Now as many have said this class of drugs have been on the market for decades meaning we have decades of safety studies. More rare side effects are absolutely possible, as are some more emerging disease treatments.

But the op is not acknowledging that. When presented with a longotidudal study that showed a number of benefits of the drug she copied and pasted only the side effects.

You say we need more data could you give an n number and time scale of when you think this will be sufficient? Since 20 years of data in millions of patients is not enough.

Where did I say it was??

Your post at 10.17 today which ended with the sentence Which basically takes us back to … it’s a personal choice. Stop judging.

I think we should all agree it is personal choice as you say. There was no need for any personal comments towards others on this thread because at the end of the day we're all entitled to hold different opinions and express them as long as we do so politely. I'm not judging anyone for taking weight loss drugs and I'm genuinely sorry if it came across that I am in any of my comments.

I think what is worth acknowledging - particularly for those who haven't struggled with obesity and/or yo yo dieting themselves, and who haven't had problems with increased hunger / cravings - is how much fat phobia exists in society.

Stereotypes about overweight people are so frequent: eg lazy, not disciplined, yadi yadi ya ...

That's what's in the background - unsaid - in a lot of these "debates".

True but I also think because it’s an emotive subject sometimes people see a judgement that isn’t there. The fierce responses from some people to an AIBU has been surprising to me because there are ways of saying you think someone is being unreasonable without resorting to personal attacks about people’s intelligence or likely weight.

AIBU by its very nature elicits emotive judgemental responses which has always been the case.

I think every time the post is about GLP-1 agonists in relation to obesity and weight loss that judgement is there, whether people want to admit it to themselves or not. There weren't years worth of weekly threads about 'concerns' when they were licensed just for diabetes, not are there dozens of 'concerned' threads about their likely future use in the treatment of heart issues, Alzheimers, alcohol addiction etc. The 'concern' only comes when they're used in the treatment of obesity.