Sky News discussion about weight loss pills this morning

[ffsarewedoingthis]

They’re going through the daily papers and as per usual, three thin women are saying the same things, “there’s no long term data” (incorrect, these drugs have been in use for decades), “people who don’t need them use them” (very rare, and we don’t ban things like alcohol because kids sometimes get hold of it), “there’s a pressure to take them” (no, there’s not, if anything it’s the opposite).

AIBU to be utterly fed up of this discourse? I’m on WLI and have been for the last two years. I’ve lost ten and a half stone. It has quite literally saved my life.

Why, when they’re having these discussions, do they never discuss the fact that being obese is much much worse than any potential side effects of these drugs? Why don’t they discuss that almost every study coming out has been overwhelmingly positive, with noted positive cardiac benefits? The benefits in terms of addiction etc., are known as well.

The news trying to put people off these drugs is scary, especially when it’s three women who have obviously never experienced what it’s like to be morbidly obese and feeling like you’re suffocating in your own body.

Important to note that the appropriate threshold for needing help isn't 'is this easier than losing 10 stone'.

Okay.

Except it isn’t, but I can see you’re very anti “someone checking you’re doing okay on medication,” for whatever reason.

Next time I have a meds review at the doctors, I’m gonna just not go, and tell him it’s none of his fucking business. 😂

Hi @ffsarewedoingthis

I understand from your (many) posts that you feel there is a personal vendetta by "thin" people. Those who you feel want to prevent people like you using weight loss drugs.

That's one perspective.

But I have one simple question for you. It is a question that I predict you'll duck and ignore:

Can anyone in public life EVER put forward a criticism of (or a concern about) a weight loss drug...without being seen as "anti-fat" or a negative person?

I think people like yourself are so happy with the results, that you will want to protect the existence of these drugs at all costs. You do this with a kind of belligerence and passion bordering on fervour.

I'm happy for you that things worked for you. Why would I want another human being to suffer? It sounded from previous posts that you were in a lot of mental pain from the challenges of obesity. I am glad that pain has been lifted.

However I do not think it gives you the right to shout down anyone who puts forward genuine critical concerns.

I also don't think it should be a clarion call for others to say "this shouldn't be monitored by GPs" etc.. as a poster just said earlier, it's lovely that folk can pick and choose so easily as to which medicines we should and shouldn't be monitored on as women. Maybe the Pill should also go in this category, because the positive effects outweigh any negative?

In the typical 2020s style, people want to shout "fake news!" whenever anything legitimate or critical can be tied to an agenda to discredit it.

YABVU.

I've bought shares in Novo Nordisk.

I also don't think it should be a clarion call for others to say "this shouldn't be monitored by GPs" etc.. as a poster just said earlier, it's lovely that folk can pick and choose so easily as to which medicines we should and shouldn't be monitored on as women. Maybe the Pill should also go in this category, because the positive effects outweigh any negative?

The pill is a great example of a medication that gets prescribed without active GP monitoring. When I was on it, my GP asked me to send in my weight and BP and took my word for it. The scrutiny with MJ through my private, online provider has been greater and more regular.

Those patients DO need it.

No absolutely not, I am all for checks for those who need it or wish it. I am against your proposal of it for everyone. For many reasons. Not just wasting peoples time. But the cost of doing it. The sheer resources required.

as you don’t use the drugs, so don’t understand the process, you won’t know thay every time you order you need to answer a lot of questions, about how you find the drugs. I understand you want in person checks. For a drug you don’t use or wish, But for me that’s available for those who wish it, you simply pick a pharmacy that offers that, and I don’t see the need for the NHS to step in unless they prescribe it.

This is such a silly post, I know you’re not asking me, but of course discussion is welcomed be it negative or positive. The issue posters like you face is it needs to be accurate. If it’s not then yes, it will be pointed out. And corrected as it should be. As you should wish it to be. But you don’t. Do you. You and others want to keep posting erroneous crap and have it run free.

as for people protecting the drugs existence, that’s ludicrous. The drugs are here to stay, in fact more of them are coming to market. Better stronger drugs, pills implants. It’s a huge advancement in medicine.

no one needs to protect their existence, every single person on them knows this. Because of the safety record and efficiency, the enormous health benefits.

As for monitored by gps. Fortunately for us, and unfortunately for you, the mhra and rhe nhs agrees with us, it doesn’t need to be monitored for everyone. Just an initial notification to the gp then checks by pharmicies, it is working extraordinarily well. Try to remember these drugs are not uk specific. The global health authorities talk to each other. They share info. Again foruntualry for us.

as for genuine criticism of a prescription medication, bring it on. But make sure it’s accurate. Or yes, you will be put back in your box.

My guess is the quality of discussion would probably improve if people thought more about resource allocation in a shortage sector and the existing model of reliance on patient self-reporting before they came up with ideas for change.

But it's hard to get past the idea that at least some of our contributors don't actually know about these things before someone on WLIs tells them.

AHAHA @Fiendishandfiery wow!

At what point did I ever say I was supporting "inaccurate" criticism of the drugs?

Once again, my point proven - people who support these drugs are so fervent, that any criticism will be labelled "inaccurate" immediately, regardless of whether it is or not. It's the "fake news" theory but for weight loss drugs.

It’s not point proven is it. If you’ve genuine accurate criticism then let’s hear it; prove your point, let’s have it.

That’s sort of the point.

I do know that you have to answer questions, I don’t think that’s thorough enough. As I said - anyone can fill a form in, so I think an extra layer of accountability would be better.

Not everyone who needs that accountability would a) recognise that and seek it, or b) actually want it if they knew it would make their process more thorough. They may well welcome its lack of accountability.

I actually think they should be more widely available through the NHS, which would support what I’m suggesting. Not necessarily because of that accountability issue, but because of the risks we’ve discussed being associated with obesity.

I think it’s unreasonable that some obese people pay hundreds a month to cure an illness that others can access for free.

It’s the same illness, the available treatment should be the same.

I’d welcome all with an obese BMI being able to access them through the NHS, with the relevant checks in place.

Nobody who's claimed that people being prescribed WLIs need an NHS GP to provide diet and exercise support as well has spelled out what they think that is yet, or if they have I've missed it and would appreciate it being quoted. That would be the next step, I think. It probably needs to be explained before we can talk about why we should believe it would be beneficial, which again has to precede any call on whether this is the best use of scarce resources or not.

I'm in favour of greater NHS access and think it'll ultimately happen, but the resource and logistical issues seem like they'll take a while. I'd love to be wrong, but it might be most realistic not to expect this til the price drops.

I think we all understand you wish additional checks for a drug you neither wish or use. You need to accept others do not agree with you. And neither to any of the health authorities.

however I agree with you it should be widely available on the nhs, simply they don’t have the money, it is not they don’t wish to. They can’t afford it.

of course it’s awful people have to pay.its a life saving medication with enormous health benefits, millions who would benefit cannot access as they can’t afford them. But it doesn’t change the fact we don’t have rhe money to pay for it. The nhs has many other priorities. Right now they spend 12 billion a year on treating rhe effects of being over weight. As more people use them privately. That 12 billion will drastically reduce.

30 million people in the uk are overweight or obese. 7 million on the drugs,so about 22 percent. So that in itself should save the nhs approx 3 billion a year as those people will no longer need to use the nhs for weighr related heath issues. That 3 billion can be used on other things.

i myself am a micro example. I had to see my gp monthly due to uncontrollable high blood pressure. Sometimes every two weeks. I was having regular blood tests every 3 months as they were concerned rhe bp meds would damage my kidneys. They ran regular ecgs to check my heart wasn’t damaged. I’m now off the awful meds, my blood pressure naturally healthy, I do at home readings quarterly and have annual blood tests , all of which were optimal at rhe end of last year. past that I no longer need to see my gp due to weight related health issue.

multiply me up my several million and the saving is clear. And it’s also hugely clear that today’s system works incredibly well. It balances risk and the health authorities know how to do this. Sure some people will abuse. But it’s the same for many drugs. The vast majority don’t need extra checks.

And I simply don’t understand why someone who neither takes the drugs or wishes them is so laser focused on them. My friends son take prEP, he has to have quarterly hiv tests, I can’t imagine telling him I feel he should have more checks. Foe the simple reason the drugs are not aimed at me, I’m a straight woman. I’ve no skin in the game and his opinion matters, not mine. Just like these weighr loss injections are not aimed at you as you don’t wish them. You’ve no skin in this game.

That’s not how marketing works, respectfully.

They are aimed at me, because of course they are. I’m exactly the target audience, and I’m choosing not to buy them. Both things are true.

My son is the target audience for plastic tat, whether I buy him it or not.

We’re also allowed opinions on things we’re not actually using.

The savings are clear, and I think it’s a real shame that isn’t being considered to more readily provide them on the NHS.

Speculate to accumulate, essentially. Yes the outlay will cost, but you’re right, the relevant savings would be astronomical.

It should still be optional, but that option should be available without people paying thousands.

Well I guess we could say many things are aimed at us. I guess I jist don’t spend my time laser focused on something I don’t want and the folks who do use it, why they use it and how they use it. For me if I’m not wishing it then I consider the people who do are the target market and their opinion counts.not mine. For example I seldom use public transport, I have an opinion on it, but I don’t spend large parts of my day focused on it and arguing with regular users I know best.

anyway, we align on the nhs, it will get there, but it will be many years before the nhs makes it widely available

the WHO issued instruction to all global health authorities to make these drugs affordable, when on private prescription as cost was such a high entry barrier, but no one seems to be doing anything about it. Only trump and all he did was succeed in making the uks price higher really and brining the USA in line with it, but in real terms as our average salaries are less, the drugs are way more expensive here than in the USA, and of course we can’t access on health insurance,

I just wonder why so many people seem to have settled at the level of focus that allows them to say what should or shouldn't be happening and assert that various extra hurdles would help, but that doesn't enable them to show their working out.

The pills cost 3.33 day to start off. It's quite easy to spend 3.33 less a day on food/drinks/snacks and break even. The pills are Novo Nordisk so not subject to the USA's Ely Lilley price increases of last year.

The NHS is weak at efficient distribution of medical services in my opinion, however having said that my GP told me I'm doing the right thing by paying for this as the age related test results she requested after a couple of years on and off were, as she said, "Beautiful".

She receives a notification of my private prescription, it's on my NHS app. She is performing additional checks, she told me I'm doing all the right things. She called me to check what I had been prescribed when I ordered an anti sickness medication she didn't recognise. I also weight train which appears to be very common advice from the prescribers to maintain muscle mass. It's actually common advice for ageing now whether you take them or not as muscle mass reduces naturally with age.

Anyway, keep up the publicity, I've bought a chunk of shares in my ISA.

I'm far from obese 😁 I'm still quite musculy and have a reasonable body fat % and your awful response to my polite reasonable answer is a prime example of the unnecessary pressure I was talking about
Edit and I'm 5 ft 7
Replying to Fiendish

Yes I’m finding it fascinating. I’d fully understand if someone was desperate to get the drugs and couldn’t afford them,resentment and envy could have you desperately praying for hurdles to people getting them and a bit obsessed. You’d be thinking it was shit and unfair which it is, and I guess not everyone is a good person. They cant just own it. They’d hate the player as well as the game.

but to be able to lose weight easily. Not wish the drugs.be able to access them be fat through choice, have no food noise, but position yourself as someone who should be telling people on them what barriers there should be to their access.even saying some are so thick they don’t know they need checks

but most fascinating is declaring GPs should do regular checks on people. A huge financial burden to the nhs where many people can’t get appts as it is when they need them, Whilst simultaneously complaining as the nhs doesn’t widely prescribe as it can’t afford.

so yeah let’s spend the money we free up on gp appts. Not giving more people the drugs on the nhs, not improving cancer care or mental health provision. No let’s spunk it on needless checks for folks on them so we catch the anorexics.

GPs are monitoring. The prescribers notify GPs of each prescription, and new weight.

You can't check out without providing your GP address with the company I use.

I can see this from both sides, having been a prescriber who often issued these meds and, having used them myself to shed 6 stone so I am now just overweight instead of morbidly obese.
Firstly, yes, the system is fairly frequently abused. It is hard to police but some companies (in my view) are far less professional than others in fighting it. I have reported more than one company to the GPhC and the MHRA (and one company more than once!) Having said that, we have seen this with other meds that have come off doctor only supply, albeit on a smaller scale.
I would be reluctant to make the whole thing NHS supply only as the results we saw with NHS patients appear to me to be less than those seen privately and we saw far higher drop out rates. I don't know if that is as simple as people are more focussed and committed if they have to pay or if it may be more down to patient health, education and social factors though.

Back to the media coverage, did anyone else see the article in The Times this Saturday, headlined "I tried the GLP1 tablets - here's what happened" with a picture of Wegovy tablets? If you read the article she says she was terribly ill after just one tablet but it is only on more careful reading you find:
a) she wasn't overweight to start with
b) she wasn't prescribed the tablets, she got them off a friend
c) she didn't start at the recommended low dose and increase - she started at the max dose
d) the tablet she took was not Wegovy, it was Rybelsus (also semaglutide but a different formulation which is now used exclusively for diabetics)
e) This all happened 4 years ago!
Makes a headline though...

Personally I am very much in favour of people being allowed to make their own assessment of risk vs benefit within reason and it is up to the prescriber to monitor that. My own health risk was high (morbidly obese, high family risks, etc) and I was happy that, for me, the benefits of losing weight outweighed the risks of the medication. There is also very encouraging research on other health benefits but, probably, too soon to say

maybe some people are just sick of reading falsehoods and assumptions?

Anorexia will kill you much more quickly.

Not true and it’s not about speed. You can be anorexic and live a very long time, you can be obese and die of a heart attack or have a stroke relatively quickly.