Do any providers under 25 bmi?

[coldcallerbaiter]

Say you are BMI 24.9 or 25.5 etc and hold weight around the middle, are there providers who ignore the over 27 BMI rule? Or do you just have to lie?

But why is it easier for @Ohnonotmeagain the stay this way than it would be for someone using WLI to do so?

That is the bit I'm trying to understand. If it's easy to do then no one needs to use WLi under a BMI of 25. It can't be both ways (when talking about those previously obese not that have never been so). I feel that people in this category are being told it's easier for them when I don't see why it is.

"Just have to lie" 😂

MedExpress want a full photo. You might be able to get away with a pound or two, but you're talking about stones, so no. Minimum bmi is 30 for weight loss only with them. They'll give you maintenance doses down to 23 I believe, although I think some people had had problems when they reached 25. Starting that low though? No chance. And it's only 27 if you have certain conditions.

“Dave Ricks, the CEO of Eli Lilly, revealed in an interview with the Financial Times that the company is drafting plans to study the effects of its anti-obesity drugs, Mounjaro and Zepbound, on individuals with a body mass index (BMI) below the overweight category. Traditionally, clinical trials for weight-loss treatments focus on individuals with a BMI of 30 or higher (indicative of obesity), or those with a BMI of 27 and above who also experience weight-related health complications. However, Ricks suggested that this threshold may not be suitable for everyone.
“Maybe the cut-off point of [a BMI of] 27 we use in northern Europe and the US for entry into the studies isn’t appropriate. Maybe we should use [a BMI of] 25. Long term, should we look at health maintenance? Maybe we will,” Ricks stated.
Historically, trials of Eli Lilly’s injectable Zepbound and their experimental weight-loss pill orforglipron have centred around individuals classified as having overweight or obesity. Ricks, however, believes there may be merit in lowering the threshold, particularly in the case of orforglipron, which has demonstrated more moderate weight-loss results compared to injectable options.
Ricks further speculated that the drugs, part of the GLP-1 class of medications, could potentially be offered to individuals with a BMI below 25, which is classified as a healthy weight, but who are concerned about future health risks. He commented: “It’s possible that someone with a BMI of 24.9, who’s saying, ‘I’d like to not get diabetes in my life . . . or vascular dementia,’ or who is at an increased risk of stroke, could benefit from these treatments”

For someone of a healthy weight to look at a serious prescribed med

The problem is they don't recognise it as the "serious prescribed med". They only hear the parts they want to hear encouraged by the social media hype around them. They don't do an risk assessment, if it was ok for Cybil at the hairdressers, sisters, friends mum them it must be ok for them is probably as far as they get.

A prime example is the poster on this thread whose non-obese "friend" has bulimia and eating disorders, serious MH conditions, but MJ is seen as a magic potion.

Nevermind how vulnerable their MH in relation to their disordered eating is, how clear it is the injection is not safe for them, that they have no support for their fragile MH while using a "serious prescribed med"...........but they are happy just now so all is ok. With the risks they are taking and how vulnerable they are I dread to think where that friend will be in a years time and who will pick up the pieces. Possibly spiral into anorexia, or a complete MH break down when MJ effects dimmish or stop working for them.

Until trials have taken place, the risk must be presumed to outweigh the benefits. Thalidomide warns us what happens when drugs are presumed safe

There are posters declaring that they are known to be dangerous for lower BMIs and will never be made available for that reason. They cannot possibly know this and are stating their own opinions as fact.

Prescribing rules are based on a class analysis of thousands of people. The less than 1% of obese people who can lose weight to become not obese and keep it off unaided cannot dictate the prescribing rules. It would be like setting speed limits based on what a professional rally driver can do safely, when speed limits need to reflect what typical drivers can do safely.

All they’re ‘being told’ is that they don’t currently meet the prescribing guidelines.

But that's exactly the risk people are talking about - it's currently completely untested for people of a healthy weight. Taking untested meds/ meds that you don't meet the prescribing criteria for is of course high risk.
It would be great if they find that WLI are appropriate for people who are just overweight, or at a healthy weight but with a history of struggling with staying a healthy weight. To make it easier for everyone to reach and stay in the healthy BMI range would be an absolute game changer.
As this thread demonstrates though that would still have to be very carefully monitored so people with a history of eating disorders aren't going to 'just lie' to get hold of meds that could be catastrophic for them. If my uni friend who survived eating sachets of ketchup could have got hold of Mounjaro to reduce what much have been overwhelming feelings of hunger, then I'm sure she would. And it would have killed her.
Currently though these are meds for obese people to reverse obesity and all of the significant risks that that obesity brings.

I meant being told on this thread. It was stated several times that now they are under a BMI of 25 they can stay that way.

I'm simply questioning why that is for those who lose weight in other ways compared to WLI?

I think it's a complicated issue and that current cut offs are overly simplistic.

I'm also pointing out that some of the arguments don't make sense. Anyone who questions safety is shot down with 'these are diabetes drugs that have been around for decades '. Not everyone with diabetes who takes these is overweight so how can both be true?

I personally wouldn't look near them at that BMi but I think it's unfair to assume that everyone who has managed to get down from previously being obese has no food noise or can stay that way more easily (if we are saying being obese changes your body and that's why you need to stay on these drugs once a healthy BMI has been achieved).

BMI though isn’t the most reliable of measures, it’s too basic. We all know what we personally should weigh/ feel to be healthy, depending on our own bone structure and muscle mass. I’d also suggest that it isn’t uncommon to get meds off license on prescription, I’m personally taking testosterone along with HRT yet it isn’t licensed in the UK for women, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it is unsafe. And whilst I personally wouldn’t lie to get these meds if I could find someone who would prescribe off license to me knowing my facts I would do so. Please note I am not advocating these be handed out like sweets, more that there is an argument for quality of life to be taken in to account and I certainly wouldn’t judge someone for taking medical resources any more than I’d judge a skier for getting a broken leg and taking them.

The problem is they don't recognise it as the "serious prescribed med". They only hear the parts they want to hear encouraged by the social media hype around them. They don't do an risk assessment, if it was ok for Cybil at the hairdressers, sisters, friends mum them it must be ok for them is probably as far as they get.

How unbelievably rude and patronising. How on earth do you know "they don't recognise it as a serious prescribed med". People are very capable of understanding how serious a medication is and of weighing up the risks to themselves.

You give my friend as an example. That is incredibly unfair. You have never met my friend and have made all sorts of assumptions. She is extremely well educated and very well aware of the risks. She spent a very long time weighing up the pros and cons and the risks to her own physical and mental health before making what has turned out to be, one of the best decisions for both her mental and physical health that she could have made. I have never seen her looking so happy and healthy.

I appreciate in similar circumstances you may have made a different decision. But to assume people "only hear what they want to hear" or get their information from social media or "Cybil at the hairdresser" is very rude, quite offensive and riddled with assumptions.

People with a history of eating disorders absolutely should not be taking weight loss medication.

Actually the clinical data is not that clear cut.

A recent met analysis ( large scale secondary analysis of the scintific literature) found that actually it is benifical in binge eating disorders including bulemia. With mental health actually improving on it.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10915596/

We all know what we personally should weigh/ feel to be healthy, depending on our own bone structure and muscle mass.

We don't "all know" though: anorexia exists and completely warps the sufferer's sense of what their body should weigh and feel like. Anorexics already abuse laxatives and slimming aids to lose weight and would abuse WLIs too. Before WLIs can safely be prescribed to help healthy weight individuals stay slim, there must be a reliable means of detecting anorexics and there must be a fraud-proof monitoring protocol in place to make sure that people don't become underweight.

Apologies, the majority of us without an eating disorder know, you are quite right.

I’ll rephrase that. People with past history of eating disorders shouldn’t be lying to obtain WLI and taking it without any monitoring.

thr cost and logistics would be enormous. and mean peiple who need the drug cant get it.

most anorexics dont need wli , they starve themselves, struggle to eat. it is a mental illness. they do this already without the drugs.

what there needs to be for anorexics is better provision to deal with their issues.

thr cost and logistics would be enormous.

The logistics looks like getting weighed when you go to the pharmacy to collect your repeat prescription. It's not onerous.

I’m sure they are wanting to sell the drug to anyone and make them more money. Doesn’t mean they should or that people should take it. Counselling would be more appropriate for people who are half a stone off what someone has decided is a perfect weight, (BMI is a highly flawed method of gauging overweight), and are perfectly healthy but willing to risk their health for purely cosmetic reasons. I have significant problems being in the morbidly obese category and am the sort of person this drug was designed for. I have no time for the “worried thin” tbh. They’re the type at WW who’d sit next to me moaning how they used to be 8 stone but at the age of 80 can’t get below 9.5. I’d look at them and think “really? 🙄

This drug wasn’t designed for you. It was designed for diabetes.

Please just read up before posting. The drug was simply approved for diabetes first, it was always going to be approved for weight loss, same as cardio vascular and kidney disease which is next, many drugs do multiple purposes.

It wasn’t “designed” as a weight loss drug for non-diabetic obese people.

Are you quite ok? They knew what it was as it was developed. You can’t possibly think it was a massive surprise.

Well it certainly wasn’t developed for slim people who want to be thinner. It’s a drug with side effects, some of them serious, and I wouldn’t want to be on it if I was a normal weight.