8 ms·

GLP-1s are among the most important drug breakthroughs

58 points by car 2y ago

car 2y ago
https://archive.is/aVVg0 https://archive.is/aVVg0
nonameiguess 2y ago
Does this seriously need to be a first-page discussion topic on Hacker News every single day from now until eternity? Can this just become a pinned thread or part of an FAQ or Wiki or something? I say this facetiously knowing Hacker News doesn't have those features, but what do these posts hope to achieve that hasn't already been achieved? We'll see some variety of: - Isn't it all just because of weight loss? Well, read the damn article because the author sure claims at least some effects don't seem to be because of weight loss. - Isn't it all just because of eating less in general being good for you? If you're overweight, sure. If you're weight stable, seemingly you can't just eat less or you'll eventually starve to death. - I'm worried about the long-term side effects we don't know about. Well, GLP-1 agonists have been approved for human use as a diabetes treatment for 20 years, so at what point are you expecting these to show up? - Isn't this an amphetamine? No, it isn't. - Isn't this addictive? No, it isn't. - What about all the horrible side effects? The side effect profile for these drugs are among the most mild of all regular use drugs you can take. The few severe effects are incredibly rare and the most common issues with nausea are heavily dose-dependent and tend to go away after a while. - Don't you need to increase the dose forever? No, you don't. The Ozempic is pretty low and stays low. The Wegovy dose is much higher but still capped, and if you see increasing dosages, it's because of titration to find the needed amount without overwhelming you all at once and taking more than you need. - Why didn't the body just evolve this itself? The human body, all mammal bodies, and possibly other animals do in fact produce GLP-1. It isn't very long-lasting in serum, though, so medical researchers figured out how to make an analog that won't break down in minutes. That's all these drugs are, something your body already makes but a longer lasting version. GLP-1 is, in fact, secreted in response to eating, and is one of the signals the body produces telling you to stop eating when you've had enough. This mechanism seems to be broken for one reason or another in many people, and those people end up obese. Increasing the level exogeneously seems to help, as you might expect. Is there anything else that is going to come up? Because it sure feels like the exact same back and forth, every single day.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nahnahno 2y ago
  This is explained in the article: “ That does happen, of course, but research shows that it is not the full story. A study of more than 17,600 overweight and obese patients from 41 countries who took semaglutide found that participants lost about 10% of their body weight and had a 20% reduction in serious adverse coronary events, strokes, heart attacks and all-cause mortality. Crucially, these cardiovascular improvements long preceded any meaningful weight loss. ”
  - MPSimmons 2y ago
    I believe the parent to your comment was ranting that those are the kinds of questions we see again and again in the repeated threads, and they're right about that.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  >- Isn't this addictive? No, it isn't. I've heard this one before. There's a little thing called the opioid epidemic that started because Oxycodone was meant to be free from the potential to be addictive. 30 years later - oops. I trust medications which haven't become generic less than leaches on any claim they make.
  - MPSimmons 2y ago
    It may not be psychologically addictive, but there are definite ramifications when my wife misses a dose of Ozempic because the pharmacies are all out of it.
  - jf22 2y ago
    I'd spent a bit more time looking up why the opiod epidemic happened. There were a whole bunch of other factors involved outside of a 30 year old marketing slogan.
    - 2y ago
Eumenes 2y ago
Ctrl + F "antibiotics", Ctrl + F "penicillin" ... seriously?
Cheer2171 2y ago
sure, if you forget about ether anesthesia, penicillin, synthetic insulin, progestin/estrogen, AZT, SSRIs, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, statins, corticosteroids .....
- cjrp 2y ago
  "_Among_ the most important..."
  - wussboy 2y ago
    I’ll come in again…
  - Cheer2171 2y ago
    well by that logic, every HN poster is _among_ the most important people in tech
    - BadHumans 2y ago
      No, we really aren't.
      - Cheer2171 2y ago
        Of course not, that's my point. Phrasing it as "among the most important" is marketing doublespeak.
        some_random 2y ago
        It can be, but that doesn't seem like a reasonable interpretation here at all. There can be (and is) a category of "most important" drug breakthroughs, which is one step above "important", two steps above "notable" etc. Ranking the breakthroughs within their category may be possible but would require a lot of arguing and term definitions, so instead we just say "among the most important".
        arcticfox 2y ago
xattt 2y ago
I’ve noticed anecdotal unfounded spitefulness towards people who use GLP1s. I don’t know if it’s rooted in jealousy over access the drug (either via insurance or having a provider willing to prescribe) or whether it’s because people see those who take it for weight loss as “cheating”.
- martin_a 2y ago
  > who take it for weight loss as “cheating” I've felt and thought about it the same way for a long time. Especially because the solution to obesity is just so easy: Eat less (and healthier) and exercise more. It's just so easy, just do it. Why do I struggle with that? Well, probably not disciplined enough. Time to feel bad about that and question everything or at least something... In theory it is easy, but reality is much more nuanced with job or personal stress, psychic health, impact of your surroundings, your body chemistry being disturbed and whatnot. This medicine seems (so far) to take stress (somewhat) out of it, so I can focus on changing the underlying behaviour without having to worry about calorie counting at the same moment. But yes, if you stop taking it, and nothing has changed, you will probably bloat up again.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 2y ago
    I think people put too much weight behind the will they think others all possess. The only empathy they summon is to compare to an ideal, without truly understanding not many are beings possessing identical traits that make up the phenomenon of behavior. No one is screaming at a schizophrenic to summon the willpower to stop hearing voices, but many certainly will do so to those fighting addictions or other ingrained behavior. This might seem like false equivalence, but they are both abnormal psychological traits, one happens to rely on the environment more than the other. As another example, some animals will overfeed if you let them, and you can craft super obese animals genetically. No one is damning fat squirrels, screaming "If only they had the willpower to stop overfeeding!"
- moduspol 2y ago
nameless912 2y ago
Okay, here's the thing. I Totally get that GLP-1's are absolute medical breakthroughs. But they are a _serious_ societal problem, IMO. My partner and I are both larger-bodied people; both our BMI's (it's a terrible measurement, I'm aware) hover just over 30. We've done a lot of work to destigmatize our own bodies and accept who we are so that we can teach our kids to have healthy self-images and not suffer the dysmorphia that we both went through for decades. We're active, we eat well, and we have great lives; we just aren't _thin_. My partner has a new coworker who just started on Wegovy and has been poisoning my partner's brain with her terrible self talk. She calls herself a "fat bitch" at work, and raves about how excited she is to "lose all the fucking weight" before her wedding next fall, and it's bad enough that my partner has had to talk to her manager and HR about it. It's bad enough that my partner broke down the other day and told me she's struggling to see herself as anything other than overweight and unhealthy because the negative sentiment her coworker has of _her_ body is leaking onto everyone else. These medications are absolutely essential for _some_ people who need to lose weight for medical reasons or need the other benefits they provide. But, they've also unlocked a cheat code for losing weight, and people like my partner's new coworker are focusing on only that aspect. The potential societal effects of making weight loss easier than ever before are kinda terrifying to me. I don't know what I'll say to my kids if they end up with our body type and come to me one day asking to go on Ozempic or Wegovy because "all the kids at school are doing it" and "being thin is what's normal now". I'm so scared that we've opened up a Pandora's box of making thin even more of an expectation because it's "easy" now. I guess my point is, I _really_ wish the FDA would step in and make it clear that these medications are not to be prescribed for cosmetic weight loss, and they should bring the hammer down on online pharmacies like Hers (which is where my partner's coworker got her Wegovy). EDIT: there are a bunch of folks in the replies telling me I'm lying to myself and misserving my kids by accepting myself. That's...odd, to say the least. Every metric I have that isn't my weight is perfectly fine. My blood pressure is normal, my cholesterol is normal, my A1C is normal, my blood sugar is normal, my doctor and I are very happy with my health. The number on the scale is _a_ representation of your health, but it's not the only or even best one. And the impact on my mental health has been astounding. I'm not going to change my mind about my weight because a bunch of folks using an extremely outdated metric of overall health tell me my number is bad.
- 2y ago
datahack 2y ago
The long-term side effects of GLP-1 drugs are not well-studied, but the press seems to talk about them as if they are—in glowing terms as if their broad adoption is a given and a lifetime attached to the tit of a friendly drug company (with your credit card inserted) is merely a temporary problem. I think we need to greet this whole class of drugs with skepticism, if for no other reason than they’re being a pharma companies’ wet dream of a product. The incentives to interrupt their rollout don’t exist. I’m aware of the wide range of benefits, and understand they may end up saving lives. But skepticism is warranted here.
- cm2187 2y ago
  How is that different from covid vaccines? The long term risk wasn't known, but covid was super dangerous for a subset of the population, so for those it was absolutely a risk worth taking, and so is obesity.
  - DonsDiscountGas 2y ago
    A vaccine only takes a few doses, plus they're pretty cheap. Worst case scenario you get a booster every year. These drugs stop working the second you drop taking them
    - PapaPalpatine 2y ago
      As a former user, “the second you stop taking them” isn’t totally accurate. It does take a few weeks for the effects to wear off and appetite to return.
      - martin_a 2y ago
        I've started using them a few weeks ago, how was your success with them?
        cm2187 2y ago
        It's down to how much of a diet you do (the drug only manages your appetite). I went hardcore and lost 40kg in 3 months, almost "effortlessly". One meal a day, no sugar, 45min cardio daily. Now trying to figure out where the floor is and planning a progressive reduction in dose/frequency over the next few months. I am lucky I had no side effect and I increased the dosage only sparingly, but people react differently.
dartharva 2y ago
Jesus, Ozempic and the weight loss drugs "revolution" are all what the Economist seems to talk about these days. For the past week it's literally the only thing they have been focusing on, world economy be damned.
- cloudking 2y ago
  Makes you wonder who is sponsoring these articles.
  - lghh 2y ago
    Does Economist have a history of having sponsored articles? Especially ones that are unmarked? If not, why does it "make you wonder"?
- SpecialistK 2y ago
  By "these days" do you mean "this week's issue"? Last week's cover was literally of a stack of US bills blasting into space to represent the strong US economy. I didn't find the GLP-1 topic interesting at first, but it was worth a read and according to quick scan of the app front page, only 4 of the 38 articles offered.
- lghh 2y ago
  I just looked at Economist's landing page and less than 5% of it was centered around Ozempic and related drugs.
  - dartharva 2y ago
    It seems to have been updated now. The landing page otherwise was dominated by the theme of their 26 Oct edition: https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2024-10-26 https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2024-10-26
_fat_santa 2y ago
I would say it's one of the most important breakthroughs of the 21st century, but as far as the most important breakthrough's ever? Sorry, antibiotics, penicillin and ivermectin hold the podium for that accomplishment. I equate GLP1 hype in the medical industry to AI hype in the tech industry. Yes it's an important breakthrough but there are other much more important breakthroughs that humans have achieved in the past.
- foobarian 2y ago
  It is wild to me that something as life-altering as antibiotics was only invented in early 20th century, and that the entire human history up to that point was antibiotic-less. I'm not sure that enough time has passed yet to fully absorb the consequences of antibiotics into culture and societal systems, and I wonder what that will look like - maybe given another century or two?
  - DrillShopper 2y ago
    Bad news - if we keep misusing antibiotics as a species we will be back in that antibiotic-less existence.
    - asdasdsddd 2y ago
      I've been hearing about this all my life. Is the problem really getting worse?
      - 11101010001100 2y ago
        What would convince you? Some references from some random person on the internet?
        asdasdsddd 2y ago
        I want a timeseries-like chart that show its getting worse over time, hopefully referenced.
vladsanchez 2y ago
https://archive.ph/aVVg0 https://archive.ph/aVVg0
littlestymaar 2y ago
These are drugs designed to fight back against the food industry and its abusive practices which damaged the lives of millions of people without consequences. But what will happen from now on? Will the obesity industry cave, or will they try to fight back and overcome the effects of the drugs with even shadier practices? Option 1 sounds overly optimistic to be honest…
- dylan604 2y ago
  Fight back against? I would say it is actually enabling. A fight back would be regulations that prevent the food industry from making anything other than food. And no, food product is not food. So this drug doesn't actually fight or make the food industry to change. It allows them to continue operating as they like.
  - littlestymaar 2y ago
    These drugs reduce the appetite of the people taking it, which drives sales low: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/05/investing/ozempic-food-companies/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/05/investing/ozempic-food-co... But yes, regulating the food industry would have achieved the same health effect than these “miracle drugs” for much cheaper and less adverse effects… But they are too big of a lobby to be targeted by governments unfortunately.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      So it's a symbiotic relationship to the food industry, not fighting back. In this way, the food industry can continue to earn profits off its products while bigPharma now as a new revenue stream that benefits from results of the food industry's decisions. Again, I do not see this as fighting back in any shape. It's some clever people seeing a way to profit off of the other industry.
      - jf22 2y ago
        An appetite suppressant does not have a symbiotic relationship with the food industry.
iambateman 2y ago
Serious question - is this article sponsored? It…feels…sponsored.
- MPSimmons 2y ago
  Someone paid the PR firm who helped the article's author, no doubt.
sasaf5 2y ago
I find it philosophical that suddenly everyone wants to take a medicine to stop wanting food. "I want to not want, but I can't help but wanting, so I want a medicine to make me stop wanting..."
- jmull 2y ago
  Wanting food is a built-in fundament of life. It's hardly comparable, and I doubt dealing with it philosophically leads anywhere.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

58 points by car 2y ago

car 2y ago

https://archive.is/aVVg0 https://archive.is/aVVg0

Does this seriously need to be a first-page discussion topic on Hacker News every single day from now until eternity? Can this just become a pinned thread or part of an FAQ or Wiki or something? I say this facetiously knowing Hacker News doesn't have those features, but what do these posts hope to achieve that hasn't already been achieved? We'll see some variety of: - Isn't it all just because of weight loss? Well, read the damn article because the author sure claims at least some effects don't seem to be because of weight loss. - Isn't it all just because of eating less in general being good for you? If you're overweight, sure. If you're weight stable, seemingly you can't just eat less or you'll eventually starve to death. - I'm worried about the long-term side effects we don't know about. Well, GLP-1 agonists have been approved for human use as a diabetes treatment for 20 years, so at what point are you expecting these to show up? - Isn't this an amphetamine? No, it isn't. - Isn't this addictive? No, it isn't. - What about all the horrible side effects? The side effect profile for these drugs are among the most mild of all regular use drugs you can take. The few severe effects are incredibly rare and the most common issues with nausea are heavily dose-dependent and tend to go away after a while. - Don't you need to increase the dose forever? No, you don't. The Ozempic is pretty low and stays low. The Wegovy dose is much higher but still capped, and if you see increasing dosages, it's because of titration to find the needed amount without overwhelming you all at once and taking more than you need. - Why didn't the body just evolve this itself? The human body, all mammal bodies, and possibly other animals do in fact produce GLP-1. It isn't very long-lasting in serum, though, so medical researchers figured out how to make an analog that won't break down in minutes. That's all these drugs are, something your body already makes but a longer lasting version. GLP-1 is, in fact, secreted in response to eating, and is one of the signals the body produces telling you to stop eating when you've had enough. This mechanism seems to be broken for one reason or another in many people, and those people end up obese. Increasing the level exogeneously seems to help, as you might expect. Is there anything else that is going to come up? Because it sure feels like the exact same back and forth, every single day.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
nahnahno 2y ago
This is explained in the article: “ That does happen, of course, but research shows that it is not the full story. A study of more than 17,600 overweight and obese patients from 41 countries who took semaglutide found that participants lost about 10% of their body weight and had a 20% reduction in serious adverse coronary events, strokes, heart attacks and all-cause mortality. Crucially, these cardiovascular improvements long preceded any meaningful weight loss. ”
- MPSimmons 2y ago
  I believe the parent to your comment was ranting that those are the kinds of questions we see again and again in the repeated threads, and they're right about that.
llm_trw 2y ago
>- Isn't this addictive? No, it isn't. I've heard this one before. There's a little thing called the opioid epidemic that started because Oxycodone was meant to be free from the potential to be addictive. 30 years later - oops. I trust medications which haven't become generic less than leaches on any claim they make.
- MPSimmons 2y ago
  It may not be psychologically addictive, but there are definite ramifications when my wife misses a dose of Ozempic because the pharmacies are all out of it.
- jf22 2y ago
  I'd spent a bit more time looking up why the opiod epidemic happened. There were a whole bunch of other factors involved outside of a 30 year old marketing slogan.
  - 2y ago

Eumenes 2y ago

Ctrl + F "antibiotics", Ctrl + F "penicillin" ... seriously?

Cheer2171 2y ago

sure, if you forget about ether anesthesia, penicillin, synthetic insulin, progestin/estrogen, AZT, SSRIs, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, statins, corticosteroids .....

cjrp 2y ago
"_Among_ the most important..."
- wussboy 2y ago
  I’ll come in again…
- Cheer2171 2y ago
  well by that logic, every HN poster is _among_ the most important people in tech
  - BadHumans 2y ago
    No, we really aren't.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      Of course not, that's my point. Phrasing it as "among the most important" is marketing doublespeak.
      - some_random 2y ago
        It can be, but that doesn't seem like a reasonable interpretation here at all. There can be (and is) a category of "most important" drug breakthroughs, which is one step above "important", two steps above "notable" etc. Ranking the breakthroughs within their category may be possible but would require a lot of arguing and term definitions, so instead we just say "among the most important".
      - arcticfox 2y ago

xattt 2y ago

I’ve noticed anecdotal unfounded spitefulness towards people who use GLP1s. I don’t know if it’s rooted in jealousy over access the drug (either via insurance or having a provider willing to prescribe) or whether it’s because people see those who take it for weight loss as “cheating”.

martin_a 2y ago
> who take it for weight loss as “cheating” I've felt and thought about it the same way for a long time. Especially because the solution to obesity is just so easy: Eat less (and healthier) and exercise more. It's just so easy, just do it. Why do I struggle with that? Well, probably not disciplined enough. Time to feel bad about that and question everything or at least something... In theory it is easy, but reality is much more nuanced with job or personal stress, psychic health, impact of your surroundings, your body chemistry being disturbed and whatnot. This medicine seems (so far) to take stress (somewhat) out of it, so I can focus on changing the underlying behaviour without having to worry about calorie counting at the same moment. But yes, if you stop taking it, and nothing has changed, you will probably bloat up again.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 2y ago
  I think people put too much weight behind the will they think others all possess. The only empathy they summon is to compare to an ideal, without truly understanding not many are beings possessing identical traits that make up the phenomenon of behavior. No one is screaming at a schizophrenic to summon the willpower to stop hearing voices, but many certainly will do so to those fighting addictions or other ingrained behavior. This might seem like false equivalence, but they are both abnormal psychological traits, one happens to rely on the environment more than the other. As another example, some animals will overfeed if you let them, and you can craft super obese animals genetically. No one is damning fat squirrels, screaming "If only they had the willpower to stop overfeeding!"
moduspol 2y ago

nameless912 2y ago

Okay, here's the thing. I Totally get that GLP-1's are absolute medical breakthroughs. But they are a _serious_ societal problem, IMO. My partner and I are both larger-bodied people; both our BMI's (it's a terrible measurement, I'm aware) hover just over 30. We've done a lot of work to destigmatize our own bodies and accept who we are so that we can teach our kids to have healthy self-images and not suffer the dysmorphia that we both went through for decades. We're active, we eat well, and we have great lives; we just aren't _thin_. My partner has a new coworker who just started on Wegovy and has been poisoning my partner's brain with her terrible self talk. She calls herself a "fat bitch" at work, and raves about how excited she is to "lose all the fucking weight" before her wedding next fall, and it's bad enough that my partner has had to talk to her manager and HR about it. It's bad enough that my partner broke down the other day and told me she's struggling to see herself as anything other than overweight and unhealthy because the negative sentiment her coworker has of _her_ body is leaking onto everyone else. These medications are absolutely essential for _some_ people who need to lose weight for medical reasons or need the other benefits they provide. But, they've also unlocked a cheat code for losing weight, and people like my partner's new coworker are focusing on only that aspect. The potential societal effects of making weight loss easier than ever before are kinda terrifying to me. I don't know what I'll say to my kids if they end up with our body type and come to me one day asking to go on Ozempic or Wegovy because "all the kids at school are doing it" and "being thin is what's normal now". I'm so scared that we've opened up a Pandora's box of making thin even more of an expectation because it's "easy" now. I guess my point is, I _really_ wish the FDA would step in and make it clear that these medications are not to be prescribed for cosmetic weight loss, and they should bring the hammer down on online pharmacies like Hers (which is where my partner's coworker got her Wegovy). EDIT: there are a bunch of folks in the replies telling me I'm lying to myself and misserving my kids by accepting myself. That's...odd, to say the least. Every metric I have that isn't my weight is perfectly fine. My blood pressure is normal, my cholesterol is normal, my A1C is normal, my blood sugar is normal, my doctor and I are very happy with my health. The number on the scale is _a_ representation of your health, but it's not the only or even best one. And the impact on my mental health has been astounding. I'm not going to change my mind about my weight because a bunch of folks using an extremely outdated metric of overall health tell me my number is bad.

2y ago

datahack 2y ago

The long-term side effects of GLP-1 drugs are not well-studied, but the press seems to talk about them as if they are—in glowing terms as if their broad adoption is a given and a lifetime attached to the tit of a friendly drug company (with your credit card inserted) is merely a temporary problem. I think we need to greet this whole class of drugs with skepticism, if for no other reason than they’re being a pharma companies’ wet dream of a product. The incentives to interrupt their rollout don’t exist. I’m aware of the wide range of benefits, and understand they may end up saving lives. But skepticism is warranted here.

cm2187 2y ago
How is that different from covid vaccines? The long term risk wasn't known, but covid was super dangerous for a subset of the population, so for those it was absolutely a risk worth taking, and so is obesity.
- DonsDiscountGas 2y ago
  A vaccine only takes a few doses, plus they're pretty cheap. Worst case scenario you get a booster every year. These drugs stop working the second you drop taking them
  - PapaPalpatine 2y ago
    As a former user, “the second you stop taking them” isn’t totally accurate. It does take a few weeks for the effects to wear off and appetite to return.
    - martin_a 2y ago
      I've started using them a few weeks ago, how was your success with them?
      - cm2187 2y ago
        It's down to how much of a diet you do (the drug only manages your appetite). I went hardcore and lost 40kg in 3 months, almost "effortlessly". One meal a day, no sugar, 45min cardio daily. Now trying to figure out where the floor is and planning a progressive reduction in dose/frequency over the next few months. I am lucky I had no side effect and I increased the dosage only sparingly, but people react differently.

dartharva 2y ago

Jesus, Ozempic and the weight loss drugs "revolution" are all what the Economist seems to talk about these days. For the past week it's literally the only thing they have been focusing on, world economy be damned.

cloudking 2y ago
Makes you wonder who is sponsoring these articles.
- lghh 2y ago
  Does Economist have a history of having sponsored articles? Especially ones that are unmarked? If not, why does it "make you wonder"?
SpecialistK 2y ago
By "these days" do you mean "this week's issue"? Last week's cover was literally of a stack of US bills blasting into space to represent the strong US economy. I didn't find the GLP-1 topic interesting at first, but it was worth a read and according to quick scan of the app front page, only 4 of the 38 articles offered.
lghh 2y ago
I just looked at Economist's landing page and less than 5% of it was centered around Ozempic and related drugs.
- dartharva 2y ago
  It seems to have been updated now. The landing page otherwise was dominated by the theme of their 26 Oct edition: https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2024-10-26 https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2024-10-26

_fat_santa 2y ago

I would say it's one of the most important breakthroughs of the 21st century, but as far as the most important breakthrough's ever? Sorry, antibiotics, penicillin and ivermectin hold the podium for that accomplishment. I equate GLP1 hype in the medical industry to AI hype in the tech industry. Yes it's an important breakthrough but there are other much more important breakthroughs that humans have achieved in the past.

foobarian 2y ago
It is wild to me that something as life-altering as antibiotics was only invented in early 20th century, and that the entire human history up to that point was antibiotic-less. I'm not sure that enough time has passed yet to fully absorb the consequences of antibiotics into culture and societal systems, and I wonder what that will look like - maybe given another century or two?
- DrillShopper 2y ago
  Bad news - if we keep misusing antibiotics as a species we will be back in that antibiotic-less existence.
  - asdasdsddd 2y ago
    I've been hearing about this all my life. Is the problem really getting worse?
    - 11101010001100 2y ago
      What would convince you? Some references from some random person on the internet?
      - asdasdsddd 2y ago
        I want a timeseries-like chart that show its getting worse over time, hopefully referenced.

vladsanchez 2y ago

https://archive.ph/aVVg0 https://archive.ph/aVVg0

littlestymaar 2y ago

These are drugs designed to fight back against the food industry and its abusive practices which damaged the lives of millions of people without consequences. But what will happen from now on? Will the obesity industry cave, or will they try to fight back and overcome the effects of the drugs with even shadier practices? Option 1 sounds overly optimistic to be honest…

dylan604 2y ago
Fight back against? I would say it is actually enabling. A fight back would be regulations that prevent the food industry from making anything other than food. And no, food product is not food. So this drug doesn't actually fight or make the food industry to change. It allows them to continue operating as they like.
- littlestymaar 2y ago
  These drugs reduce the appetite of the people taking it, which drives sales low: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/05/investing/ozempic-food-companies/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/05/investing/ozempic-food-co... But yes, regulating the food industry would have achieved the same health effect than these “miracle drugs” for much cheaper and less adverse effects… But they are too big of a lobby to be targeted by governments unfortunately.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    So it's a symbiotic relationship to the food industry, not fighting back. In this way, the food industry can continue to earn profits off its products while bigPharma now as a new revenue stream that benefits from results of the food industry's decisions. Again, I do not see this as fighting back in any shape. It's some clever people seeing a way to profit off of the other industry.
    - jf22 2y ago
      An appetite suppressant does not have a symbiotic relationship with the food industry.

iambateman 2y ago

Serious question - is this article sponsored? It…feels…sponsored.

MPSimmons 2y ago
Someone paid the PR firm who helped the article's author, no doubt.

sasaf5 2y ago

I find it philosophical that suddenly everyone wants to take a medicine to stop wanting food. "I want to not want, but I can't help but wanting, so I want a medicine to make me stop wanting..."

jmull 2y ago
Wanting food is a built-in fundament of life. It's hardly comparable, and I doubt dealing with it philosophically leads anywhere.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]