[TeMPOraL]

Which is the exact thing that addresses your objection. People, in general, are unable to downregulate their appetite on their own in order to "just eat less". Ozempic does it for them.

Honestly, I question the whole idea that failing to "eat less" is a personal problem. Historically, we jumped into obesity epidemic straight from the time when food was scarce and not very nutrient-rich. Ability to manage caloric intake in times of abundance may not be something humans have in general, as long periods of abundance didn't happen until 100 years ago.

[aniviacat]

> Ability to manage caloric intake in times of abundance may not be something humans have in general

Even in the USA, a country that is not just wealthy but also culturally obesity-friendly, the majority of people are not obese. In less obesity-friendly regions, such as Europe, only a small part of the population is obese.

Most people do manage their caloric intake. And of those who don't, many may still be able to, but simply choose not to.

It seems that humans in general do have the ability to manage caloric intake, but many don't use it.

I do think it's a personal problem. (But we should still work together as a society to help those who fail to help themselves.)

[iamacyborg]

> Honestly, I question the whole idea that failing to "eat less" is a personal problem.

I guess it depends on what we’re eating less of.

Overeating calorie dense junk food isn’t the same thing as overeating carrot sticks and you rarely hear about problems coming from the latter.

[TeMPOraL]

> Overeating calorie dense junk food isn’t the same thing as overeating carrot sticks and you rarely hear about problems coming from the latter.

Perhaps that's because "overeating carrot sticks" is a strong indicator of being in danger of starvation? People just don't overeat this kind of food if they have tastier, more calorie-dense food available.