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.

You don’t have to give your “vitals” when ordering. You verify your weight via a video call.

How about you let us access life saving medication without making it harder for us?

Because you have no right to be “cautious”, and you don’t really care?

What the hell are you on about?
Why don’t you read what people are saying rather than continuing your evangelistic rant?

What does that mean? I have no right to be cautious? I don’t really care about what?

If it’s not your body, you don’t get to be cautious about what other people put into it.

The “concern” doesn’t come from a place of caring about people’s health. Or you’d be happy that your mum and partner are healthier.

Weight loss drugs are a tool like any other. It’s up to the individual to use them responsibly. Of course they will be misused by a minority, but in general they are a big step forward in the battle against obesity.

It is important however that we continue to discuss the issues around misuse and educate people on what they should be doing alongside these drugs in terms of changing habits and exercise.

I've seen quite a few former fat people discussing how they now have an addiction to not eating, to losing weight, to pushing themselves to be as skinny as they can be. These tablets/jabs do need to be regulated better in my view. I remember a year or so ago on here it was like an ozempic mlm cult, click my link for cheaper medication, that's unlike anything I've seen with medication previously.

The pressure thing is interesting as I think there is, as ever with weight debates, pressure on both sides - take the drugs but don’t ever ever admit that you couldn’t do this the ‘real way’.

there’s definitely a lot more thinspiration in mainstream again.

The difficulty is that now these drugs exist, the ease of world travel and the internet are going to make them available to those who want them enough, even when that's not a good idea.

People often leap to greater regulation of legitimate prescribing as a solution to this. But as well as using resources that could be better utilised elsewhere and creating barriers in the way of necessary access, that also doesn't do anything to prevent people buying dodgy unregulated shit.

I’m cautious about taking it myself. And other people have a right to be cautious about taking it. I also have concerns about what may be undesirable effects or side effects in my loved ones. I don’t care if you take it, particularly as you say it’s working for you with no negative effects. I don’t care if anyone takes it, bar the concern I have about my loved ones. I think it should be freely and openly discussed in the media in a balanced way.

For those who say adverts aren’t targeted, I am getting ads on this very thread for a face cream with the bold claim that you can ‘lose the weight and keep your face’. Presumably a reference to the gaunt face that some people on WLIs get after significant weight loss.

I posted on another thread that I’ve almost accidentally ended up with a packet of the new pills as I was on the fence about it and pre registered (and pre paid yes) thinking that there would be a check with a medical professional once they were available. I’m sure the website said this.

My bmi is 27 - 28 ish but I have an auto immune disease that makes weight loss challenging but also I’d heard they could help reduce inflammation so I was intrigued.

Long story short they just arrived in the post with me never having any contact with anyone, nor posting any photos. I said I have a thyroid condition and there was no contact about that either or how it might affect medication.

This is what’s wrong with the whole market now - people can get them really easily with no checks. My BMI could have been 16 for all they know as no one checked anything.

Two things can be simultaneously true - they help those who struggle with obesity but I think they’re dangerous / playing into weight loss culture for others. Tighter regulation is needed.

I think that is a concern. It depends why people overeat in the first place. If they dopamine seek through food, and then can’t do that anymore, I think there will be some who instead start getting their dopamine hit from the weight loss.

I think the thing to remember is almost all drugs can be abused in some way, WLI have proven to be highly effective and actually a lot of the hysteria around physical side effects are often entirely misplaced or misunderstood.

The crux of the issue is because these are about weight, body image, mostly women, they’re naturally going to attract a much higher volume of opinions than anything else, because we are obsessed with what women look like and how they got there. What other drug has garnered such widespread coverage. The downsides frankly do not justify this, but we know women’s bodies are fair game. None of us are unbiased in this. We’ve all lived through generations of unhealthy body expectations.

There is a South Park episode on weight loss injections. As with many of their episodes, the observations are spot on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park:_The_End_of_Obesity

I do think it’s a feeling of superiority that some people who don’t struggle with their weight have . They think overweight people are lazy and not disciplined and that it’s the easy way out . So they come along with their faux concern when the truth is it’s just irritating to them that people who are struggling can now get down to a normal weight without much as much struggle as before .Like if you go to on to any thread here where someone mentions they are overweight looking for fashion advice or something similar to see all these secret fat shamers coming out of the woodworks to provide health advice that no one is asking for , they are acting like they are trying to be helpful but they clearly aren’t .

This - one reason I was thinking of taking them with a bmi of 27 is that lots of my friends who were previously my size (about a size 12) are now all much smaller. I eat well and exercise and think they have shrunk to a size they’ve not been before … but growing up with 90s diet culture I started to think that I needed to. It takes quite a lot of resolve not to do it. I’m fit and healthy (bar an autoimmune issue that I also thought they might help with).

Perhaps the companies enriching from this should have to pay a statutory levy that would be distributed to preventative screening services and eating disorder mental health services like the gambling industry has to pay to the government a levy for distribution to gambling addiction services (not that they pay enough of course but at least the precedent is there). Those abusing it would have access to mental health treatment and those unwittingly becoming malnourished because they have no clue how to fulfil their nutrient RDAs would be screened in a timely manner for deficiencies and advised on how to restructure their intake. Screening could include dexa scanning too - I'm seeing a lot of questionable use in older women (being underweight when older is a particular health threat). Everyone who comes on here claims to be doing strength training to look after their bones but I suspect that is not representative of the majority. Meanwhile, those benefiting can continue to do so and get their lives back from the ill health they suffered and have the needed help to survive in an environment not suited to their genes.

That’ll just be an advert MN are running.

The evidence absolutely is there - there is absolutely correlation between healthy diets and weight. And also between diets changing over time and weight gain at a population level.
Whether improved education through setting the right example of healthy diets in schools would work - well it's not been tried and the current approach is woefully inadequate, but we model all sorts of behaviors in the expectation we will influence the next generation, so why wouldn't it? I was brought up in a European country - with a very different approach to diet and much slimmer population, let's not set the bar so low. Nonetheless that population is now also experiencing higher levels of obesity, driven by easier access to processed foods. To ignore the route cause is to ignore the solution that's right there but no politician wants to grasp as it's an unpalatable truth.

A way would have to be found to ensure any such levy didn't make the product more expensive for users. Otherwise some obese people who need it would be priced out, so they'd either remain obese which is dangerous or look for cheaper, non-legit ways to access WLIs which is also dangerous.

I'm not necessarily optimistic about the capacity of the healthcare sector, NHS or private, to offer the sort of MH access you're talking about here either. The law of unintended consequences also means we'd need to think about whether the population as a whole benefits from people working in other MH roles currently moving instead to these WLI specific services you want to offer. Because you're talking about redistributing existing provision, nothing to say this would create any.

Odd interpretation ( and inaccurate) , which quite clearly highlights the sensitivities around these topics which make it so hard to have an open and honest conversation about the benefits and risks. As many posters have quite rightly highlighted there's a whole industry out there trying to make a quick profit - they're not altruistic and absolutely should be regulated. This isn't about individual choice any more than regulations around wearing seatbelts or not selling tobacco to kids is. It's about the greater good, this response highlights the individualistic society we leave in, sadly.

The evidence that nutrition education reduces societal obesity absolutely isn't there, which is what I talked about. There isn't actually even proof that teaching about healthy diets means the population as a whole will follow it in sufficient number to keep them from being obese.

There's certainly correlation between dietary change and weight gain over time in populations, but it's one of multiple factors. It's only in about the last 100 years tops that even the richest societies could give everyone as much food as they liked. People also used to live in worse heated homes, smoke at massively higher rates (nicotine has an appetite suppressant effect) and do more physical jobs, none of which are coming back soon. We don't know how much those things kept obesity rates lower.

It is actually complete guesswork that humans can live whole lives with as much food as they want always, in well heated homes, not doing manual labour and not get fat without lots of the population taking appetite suppressant drugs. We have no evidence that this is true. Even Japan, the usual go to example, has a rising obesity problem as well as a higher smoking rate than us.

I don't object to giving it a go, because even if it has no impact on obesity, better nourished fat people is an improvement. But the inconsistency in approach is the problem here. You refer to WLIs as a sticking plaster, presumably because you acknowledge it works but don't think it does enough. That does put it well ahead of nutrition education in proven impact on tackling existing obesity, and we need to be very clear about that. These are things that should only be done in addition to rolling out access to the only proven solution to obesity thus far.

So how exactly is it serving the greater good for me to not take weight loss injections, get fatter, sicker and more reliant on the nhs? I'm not costing you a penny, my visceral fat is down from 14 to 5 and I'm a healthy weight. I'm perfectly able to read the information leaflet about side effects. It's just a licensed medication, I'm not sure what the debate is meant to achieve. If you don't like companies making profits from drugs that's another issue.

Celebrities have always done this. Models took drugs in the 70s to be skinny. But also, we’ve lost sight of what normal is.

Not a single person ever told me I was too fat at BMI 36.9. No one ever had concerns about my health. Now at BMI 19, and a regular gym goer, everyone has concerns about my health and tells me I’m too thin. Make it make sense.