[bl4ckm0r3]

This approach will definitely save someone's life (and probably already is) but there's no golden pill that will, long term, give a healthy, in shape, body to people without effort.

Eating disorders are a thing and often have to do with the mind or genetics, but there are so many people just letting go to cravings and having terrible habits when it comes to eating, don't want to do any sacrifice and just let themselves go for so long than it becomes a serious health issues for them.

I see plenty of parents feeding the kids like they are going to do foie gras out of them... People eating pastries like it's chewing gum, bagels like it's a snack... some of my American colleagues have never drunk just plain water...only sodas...and a lot of it.

I really feel like this is just the trick the food (and healthcare) industry was waiting for to allow those people to eat as much as they want and don't get fat (and possibly get ill later), and the fashion industry to push for a "cheap way" to reach beauty standards (which is why this practice has mostly became popular thanks to famous people using it).

Plus there are pretty common side effects (1 out of 10 experiences them) and it fundamentally creates a dependency to a drug, because without changing habits, if a patient stops using the drug, they'll regain the weight in a short time...

Most people think they have a condition but in reality it's just them not trying to solve the problem and complaining about it.

[reisse]

> This approach will definitely save someone's life (and probably already is) but there's no golden pill that will, long term, give a healthy, in shape, body to people without effort.

Why? Is there any rational reason for such pill not to exist? Just because it seems "unfair" to the people who spent more effort to achieve the same?

The whole history of scientific progress is about achieving good things with less effort.

[bl4ckm0r3]

it's not unfair, the whole history of scientific progress is to cure unsolvable things with science. this seems pretty solvable to me ;) it's pretty much the same as giving everyone anti anxiety pills cause it's less effort than fixing the root causes.

[consteval]

I don't understand how this doesn't fix "the root cause".

The root cause of obesity is a propensity to eat too much. The root cause of alcoholism is a propensity to drink.

It follows some people are lucky and simply don't have this propensity. For those not as lucky, we can get rid of it.

The root cause of obesity IS NOT "eating too much". That's a symptom! Why do some people want to eat more than others? Are they weak? Are they stupid? Fat chance. What's wrong with their hormones and brains that this is the case? This is what Ozempic addresses. You have it backwards here: people claiming that diet and exercise are the answer are actually not looking at the root cause, people developing drugs like Ozempic are looking at the root cause.

[bl4ckm0r3]

1% of people have that root cause. The stuff I have seen in the united states is not root cause it's just bad habits. happy for them to get any pills, injection or whatever they think they need to feel good and better. Lazy people, lazy solution. We'll see long term how that works out, as much as anything diet related the usa has implemented in the past 50 years.

[consteval]

Incorrect, if only 1% of people had it only 1% of people would be obese.

If you're arguing that, in the past 50 years, something magically occurred to make people magically lazier that's a bold argument. The problem here is that you're using individual problems and language to conceptualize a societal problem. It just doesn't work that way.

Either you propose societal solutions and societal explanations, or you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. From where I'm standing, you sound clueless.

[bl4ckm0r3]

it's not magic, processed food is something recent, sugary food/drinks is something recent, bad habits and lazy sedentary life is something recent. if you don't see this then I don't know how to explain it to you. It's habit related and habit can be fixed, pills are not the best solution in my opinion.

[AndyNemmity]

>I really feel like this is just the trick the food (and healthcare) industry was waiting for to allow those people to eat as much as they want and don't get fat (and possibly get ill later)

The whole point is you don't want food. You spend significantly, massively less on the food industry.

If anything, it would be better for the food industry for it to be banned.

[bl4ckm0r3]

yeah the reality is that people are going to take it in waves to "fix the mistakes they did in the past 6 months".

[credit_guy]

> because without changing habits, if a patient stops using the drug, they'll regain the weight in a short time...

If I stop taking atorvastatin, my cholesterol will shoot up in short time. I have to take it all my life.

[AndyNemmity]

> because without changing habits, if a patient stops using the drug, they'll regain the weight in a short time...

Not a short time, in whatever the time would normally be they would gain the weight if they continue on their prior habits, or in a less time if they only mildly improve their habits, and a lot longer time if they make significant changes, and not at all if they make dramatic changes.

So far, it has little to nothing to do with the drug. This line of argument always makes no sense to me, because whatever weight was lost with the drug, wasn't gained in that time. So you remove the weight lost, and the weight that would have been gained.

It's like setting yourself back to a starting line in a race. Yes, maybe you still run as fast, and will make it back to where you were, but it has nothing to do with the setting yourself back to the starting line.

It's such a weird line of thinking. It really makes no sense to me.

Since you might still keep running, we shouldn't bother setting you back at the starting line....

[bl4ckm0r3]

there's studied that say between 1 and 2 years, that sounds like short time to me.

[AndyNemmity]

One study looked at patients with obesity or overweight without diabetes who stopped taking tirzepatide 10 mg or 15 mg after taking it for 36 weeks. Patients who stopped taking tirzepatide experienced a 14% weight regain after 1 year.

However, there are not enough studies to draw scientific conclusions, but all evidence points to what I said.

As does the discussion in places like reddit by people doing it. If they change their habits, they don't gain weight back. If they only change them somewhat, it just happens more slowly.