> My suspicion is that at least some of these medical record review studies are just driven by confounding - people who find out about GLP-1 agonists are better

> My suspicion is that at least some of these medical record review studies are just driven by confounding - people who find out about GLP-1 agonists are better educated, wealthier, or have behavioral/lifestyle traits that explain many of the apparent benefits. This exactly. There was a recent paper about Ozempic and (IIRC) dementia that saw that the drug acted implausibly quickly to prevent illness -- the Kaplan Meier curves were literally separated at day 0. [1] Confounding is rampant in this area. The people who published the paper I linked below should not be scientists. It's embarrassing. Anyone who cites it in support of Ozempec as a miracle drug has revealed that they don't know what they're doing, and should be ignored, with prejudice [2]. More generally, it's depressing that so many people are piling on here to tell you that you're wrong, based on little more than their "knowledge" that obesity is bad. The fact is that most of the science around GLP-1 agnoists and anything other than obesity is weak, to say the least. [1] I believe it was this paper. Certainly, the KM curves in this are ridiculous: https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.14313 https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz... [2] Sadly, this appears to include the "Alzheimer's Association"...though you sort of understand why they're biased in favor of miracles. EDIT: I am just now realizing that Derek Lowe is citing this paper. Oy vey.