To think it will be revealed WLI cause physical aging

[Tuliptana]

Obviously the pictures of Kelly Osbourne are both sad and terrifying.

But a few women i know have also used this method for weight loss and their skin has lost elasticity. They look at least 10 years older. Is this side effect being under played?

How depressing this thread is because the sole focus is the outrage or disgust even, or horror that women (because this seems to be about women) might look older or -- OMG - not toned

Not toned. Id top myself if I didnt look toned

Oh, hold on, I dont look toned.

Be fair though, I didnt look toned at 20 stone. No siree.

I did read it yes, but I also read the scientific papers, and those are the ones I will go with, and my own experience, not plastic surgeons in allure magazine,

Right.

Why would you think surgeons would make up what they are discovering?

It seems to me it is just an inconvenient truth.

Well said. I lost 400gms per week over 18 months and only ever spent 2 weeks at 10 behore going back down to 7.5. The majority of the posters I was on the August thread with had the same rate of weight loss as me and their loss was consistently going down - I never gained once but I did stall at one stage for a few weeks.

It's pretty obvious that plastic surgeons have skin in the game (pun intended) - keeping women insecure about their looks keeps them in business.

Cmon. No one is that naive, because it keeps them in business. The scientific results is what to look at, not people who stand to make a profit.

I know 6 other people on WLI. None of them look ill or have lost dangerous amounts of weight.

I haven’t seen anyone who I’ve thought has become so thin they look ill. So either I’m living in a different world to the WLI critics or some of you are exaggerating.

I've had 3 different surgeries (not weight or weight loss related) since I've lost weight on MJ and none of the surgeons mentioned anything about skin or organs being funny.

When I was just at the end of the weight loss, I have to agree I looked a little more saggy and face had more..not really wrinkles, sort of folds? But I personally don't think it had anything to do with GLP, just the fact that my big moon face with chubby cheeks and double chins had slimmed down and skin needed some time to adjust. Now almost a year later, the folds are gone and skin has shrunk back very nicely. Just needs some time.

If you look at old newspaper articles (before GLPs were used) about so and so's weight loss, yes many people have a skin that's a little big immediately after losing weight. But I absolutely disagree that overweight people look younger than slim ones. Middle aged mumsy barrel-waistline absoultely did not scream youth in my case.

The article is just not really something to try and base a conclusion on. I'll repost the link for ease.

https://www.allure.com/story/ozempics-effects-on-skin

There's nothing in here about how these 16 were chosen, what percentage of those the author spoke to they represent, what specific questions they were asked. It's all very 'seems' and 'notices'. You don't know to what extent they're touting for business, for example Dr Mofid is taking the opportunity to discuss how he's been adapting for this 'whole new category of patients'. He's offering new, cutting edge techniques, come to him because he's clearly given it a lot of thought. Dr Dayan is talking about post menopausal women losing fat in their faces and gives his opinion that they look older. As a facial plastic surgeon, he can of course assist with that.

None of this is to say the extremely small, not necessarily representative group of surgeons sharing observations are wrong. Not at all. For all I know they're underestimating the issue. Some of it, like people needing to drink water and not get dehydrated on WLIs, is clearly good advice and common sense. But it's not reliable scientific data.

The test, really, is whether any of the people who are accepting it as gospel and speculating based on it would do the same with an article of similar quality that drew the opposite conclusion. Maybe you would, but if so, you shouldn't.

There is some research that suggests far from killing us slowly at a population level glp1 medications may actually have health benefits over and above those you'd expect from non medicated weight loss https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666379125002873#:~:text=Beyond%20their%20well%2Dcharacterized%20effects,)%20(Figure%201A).. Hopefully this will go some way to reassuring the incredibly concerned people on mumsnet that the jabs aren't ageing our insides.

So anti WLI people

would you rather people continued to suffer from type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, strokes, heart attacks, increased risk of cancer, joint pain, sleep apnea, fertility problems, mental ill health- all of which are not just ageing but lead to early deaths

or had a few extra wrinkles

just admit it - you aren’t ’concerned’ you are jealous

I work in the cosmetics industry and for the most part it is owned by men. The same can be said of the weight loss industry. As mentioned up thread both WW and SW have come out with WLI support diets because their business has been severely affected by these drugs.
Most plastic surgeons? Men. If women have choices the men like to take them away. Bariatric surgery has dropped significantly (some might remember the deaths from overseas surgeries). That is hardly heard of these days. Surely that's progress?
I started dieting to have surgery and by the time I was offered an appointment I had lost over two thirds of my access weight, I was too light. The surgeon was a bit pissed off.

I do think big business is behind the scaremongers. It's the same in my industry. The female cosmetic founders get smeared or they're bought out by men. We've got a big expose coming up and the ones the programme is focusing on are women. The finger pointers? Men.

These new drugs are like the pill. When that was launched the media implied any future babies would be deformed. The world would become degenerate. I wonder who was behind that?

Kind of feels like the "fatty bashing" threads that used to be so popular on MN have morphed into "faux concern about everyone dying, or even worse LOOKING OLD <gasp> from WLI" threads.

Completely agree. Every time I see my neighbour he says "oh dont lose any more weight, you're skin and bones" - I'm not, I'm still 12.5 stone. And still obese. I just look a lot smaller than I did! People really do need to understand that you can't tell weight by looking at a person!

What's funny about this post is that no one on this thread is 'anti-WLI' - people are 'anti using drugs for a purpose they were not intended', which is a different thing. Very obviously, people who are at risk because of their weight will benefit from WLIs, also very obviously, some people are taking WLIs who no longer have a clinical need for them. This group is actually at higher risk of many of the things you list as a result of abusing a medicine. There are plenty of scientists who acknowledge that so-called 'Ozempic face' is one of the risks, and is a real thing...again, not a problem if you are improving your overall health, but a weird thing to risk to be thinner if that isn't medically necessary.

Yes it does. I lost half my body weight when DH died 3 years ago, and it undoubtably makes you looked older, as skin tends to sag a bit.

Having said that, I feel healthier and there are much better clothes to buy in the small sizes. Plus, they look better than when you’re fat.

A matter of choice.

The other thing that is really odd is the "jealousy" argument.

"You don't need WLI's with potential side effects in order to lose weight, so you are jealous of people who do." Um ... ok.

Maintenance is not abusing drugs, just like continuing to take blood pressure medication when your blood pressure has become normal is not abusing drugs.

Having an eating disorder is having an eating disorder.

Do you have any evidence for any of those statements @Soontobesingles?

There have been posters on MN who are below prescribing criteria who've said they felt jealous about not being able to access the drugs, as they felt it would be easier than having to work very hard to maintain their weight. Whether any are on this particular thread, I couldn't say, but it comes up sometimes. One or two had eating disorders, I remember a thread in the WLI forum last year, but I don't think they all do.

Fwiw I can see where they're coming from. I'm one of those for whom the drugs do make it a piece of piss, no real side effects. I pay probably not even £30 a week for a no added effort normal BMI. Logically yes they are still better off not needing them, but it's not just about that.

A maintenance dose is recommended. It's not abusing anything. And as I linked above, this medication may actually be beneficial for my health over and above the weight loss. A healthier, longer life for less than £200 a month. That's pretty good value in my book.

There are also a lot of people who are not wanting the drugs themselves, are not judging those who have benefitted from them for taking advantage of that (and in the same situation might well have done so themselves) but who also worry about broader implications of something that is clearly getting a lot of attention and promotion by those who have benefitted, with, apparently, no ability to comprehend that not everyone's circumstances are theirs, and that what is good for one person may not be such a well-balanced risk for another. People are allowed to question that aspect - and, indeed, I believe, should.

What an odd post, people are anti taking drugs when not required so are posting about folks looking older and adamant fat people look younger?

obesity is a relapse disease, the wpuld health organisation and all the global health authorities approve and recommend this drug to be used to maintain and ensure no regain, due to the risk to health.

I don’t see this anti drugs when not required hysteria on any other drug on here, just drugs that make women slim.

funny that,

Questioning who? No one is questioning anyone on a chat forum, if you wish to question it, write to the manufacturers, or the mhra or the world health authority, but raving on about women looking older on mumsnet is not questioning it by any stretch of the imagination.

the fundamental issue someone touched on up thread, is these are drugs that one of the outcomes is they make women more conventionally attractive. As slim is perceived as more conventionally attractive. And that’s why all the fury.

This angle always baffles me, there are thousands of medications on the market - for a wide range of conditions - and never have I ever seen people trying to worry about the side effect of medications that they aren't prescribed...on behalf of others. And despite being repeatedly told that these same medications have been in use for decades for diabetics, the concern for the side effects only became so widespread when the beneficiaries were fat people.