9 ms·
Ozempic increases risk of debilitating eye condition: studies
- gnabgib 2y agoThe medicine: semaglutide (Ozempic, Rybelsus, possibly Wegowy)
- rzzzt 2y agoThe eye condition: non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION)
- BJones12 2y agoNon-arteritic → Not involving arteries [0] Anterior → Front part Ischemic → Low blood flow Optic → Related to the eye Neuropathy → Nerve damage [1] "Non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) refers to loss of blood flow to the optic nerve (which is the cable that connects the eye to the brain). This condition typically causes sudden vision loss in one eye, without any pain." - https://www.brighamandwomens.org/neurology/neuro-ophthalmology/non-arteritic-anterior-ischemic-optic-neuropathy https://www.brighamandwomens.org/neurology/neuro-ophthalmolo... [0] This differentiates it from a similar condition that does involve arteries [1] More literally, nerve sickness
- magic_smoke_ee 2y agoThanks, chubbyemu ;)
- compiler-guy 2y agoImportant to note that this side effect is still very rare and that we still use drugs with similarly serious and rare side effects. The authors of the study do not recommend abandoning these drugs, rather we should understand and manage the risks.
- lawlessone 2y agoDoesn't untreated diabetes also cause blindness in some people? definitely seems better to take it than not.
- Baeocystin 2y agoIt does. High blood sugar levels are hard on every system in the body. One thing about semaglutide is that it can lower blood sugar levels past normal, too. One of my diabetic friends had to lower her dose of Ozempic precisely for this reason. In general, it wouldn't surprise me if pathologies that involve ischemia could be exacerbated by a treatment that lowers energy supply as well.
- xattt 2y agoObesity goes hand in hand with hypertension, so this is a double-whammy for organs with particularly sensitive microstructures (like eyes but also kidneys).
- tssva 2y agoLowering blood sugar below normal levels is hardly unique to semaglutide or GLP1s in general. Most drugs targetting type 2 diabetes can do so and sometimes need to be adjusted to prevent hypoglycemic events. Insulin in particular poses a significant risk of hypoglycemic events which is why many insurances cover continuous glucose monitors for those taking insulin.
- NewsaHackO 2y agoGLP1 agonists on its own, has a very low chance of cause significant hypoglycemia because it's action the blood glucose dependent. It almost exclusively happens when patient are taking another agent is taking a diabetic medication that has a proven track record of causing hypoglycemia on it's own
- Mistletoe 2y agoAnd obesity has passed smoking as the leading cause of preventable death in the US.
- engineer_22 2y agoin patients with Type 2 diabetes
- beardedwizard 2y agothis part was both clear and unclear to me - does it exclude patients using it for weight loss or not?
- mikaraento 2y agoThey didn't study patients using semaglutide for weight loss only. I guess a Bayesian would increase their estimated probability of such a problem also for the weight loss case, but not by as much (as diabetes predisposes people to other ailments).
- beardedwizard 2y agoWhat you are saying makes sense. Subjectively I feel like they could have done a better job at making this distinction clear given the explosive use for weight loss - but maybe it's just because my interest in this is outside of diabetes.
- redeux 2y ago> Two independent studies from the University of Southern Denmark (SDU) show that patients with type 2 diabetes who are treated with the drug Ozempic have an increased risk of developing damage to the optic nerve of the eye [NAION], which can lead to severe and permanent loss of vision. > The condition [NAION] is often developed by patients who are at particular risk of cardiovascular disease. The risk factors are diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Patients affected by the condition also tend to have some physical conditions in the eye, which can be the triggering factor.
- monero-xmr 2y agoIf you literally cannot stop yourself from being obese any other way, then Ozempic and similar may be a good choice. But the side effects are large. You can never, ever stop taking it. We don't know what being on it for decades causes. There are anecdotes that it numbs you out emotionally. There are no shortcuts in life. There is always a tradeoff.
- nwienert 2y ago1) Side effects not much more than the most tame of drugs, like aspirin. This one, if it exists, is incredibly rare. 2) You can stop taking it, obviously. Just like any medicine, the effects will wear off, but there's no rebound effect or risky side effect from coming off. You simply return to your previous state. 3) There's more positive anecdotes than negative basically wherever you look. I have a friend who took it and while he lost 20% of weight, he plateau'd - I asked him if he was going to cycle off it and his answer was an emphatic no - I asked why, he said beyond the positive weight effects it: massively curbed his weed addiction, curbed his social media addiction, improved his sleep, and because his compulsive behaviors were down he was doing better at work, reading books for the first time in years, and going to therapy which had helped his dating life. No joke, I was floored at how ridiculous the answer sounded, especially as this was a pretty bro-y friend. Yet I've heard many anecdotes like this from others, one friend stopped a 15-year pack-a-day cigarette addiction they'd had since high school. 4) Some of the other positive trade-offs: reduces addictive behavior, heals heart/bones/brain, dramatically reduces inflammation and can fix inflammatory disorders, positive early studies for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, etc. 5) There may be no completely free lunches, but there are nearly-free lunches all the time for people with ailments. If I have debilitating GERD, there are antacids that essentially save my life with only mild side-effects. If I have bad eyesight, glasses are a miracle cure. This is all over medicine. If I'm getting surgery, 100/100 people will choose the mild side-effects of anesthetics over the pain.
- AnthonBerg 2y agoThe most interesting aspect of GLP-1 agonists is indeed the reduction of inflammation. All the effects on the mind like reduction of addiction, compulsions, craving have a direct basis in neuroimmunobiology. Neuroimmunopsychiatry. As I see it, it’s a productive and reasonably accurate view to look at things in the way that inflammation is suffering. Neuroinflammation and suffering being one and the same. In addiction, in craving, there is neuroinflammation. In getting the fix there is a reduction of inflammation. Neuroinflammation also makes us angry; it’s behavior-modifying from a social point of view too.
- qclibre22 2y agoAppears to be two science research papers: Paper: https://www.sdu.dk/-/media/files/om_sdu/fakulteterne/sundhedsvidenskab/nyheder/semaglutide-doubles-the-risk-of-naion-in-a-national-t2d-cohort-ijrv-accepted.pdf https://www.sdu.dk/-/media/files/om_sdu/fakulteterne/sundhed... "Once-weekly semaglutide doubles the five-year risk of nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic2 neuropathy in a Danish cohort of 424,152 persons with type 2 diabetes." Preprint : https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.12.09.24318574v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.12.09.24318574v... "Use of semaglutide and risk of non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: A Danish–Norwegian cohort study"
- gojomo 2y agoSuch a curiously-worded headline, to refer to Ozempic specifically – quite a recognizable & understood term at this point! – as just some "Danish diabetes medicine". I almost expected the source to be some group with a resentment towards Denmark – maybe Greenland separatists? – but no, it's just a Danish university that doesn't want to say 'Ozempic' in the headline directly.
- NavinF 2y agoMaybe the university thinks that Ozempic is not a well known brand in Denmark so being vague will get more clicks. 0.4% of them get a Ozempic prescription per year vs 1.7% of Americans per year. Seems crazy when "Nearly 1 out of every 5 Danish jobs created last year was at Novo", but it's possible. Another possibility is that they don't wanna tarnish a brand that saved the country from recession last year. No point picking fights with industry over some observational study that has no predictive power
- cyberax 2y agoThe data seems a bit strange. The peaks better align with our good old COVID, than with the semaglutide prevalence. So it might be reading complications from COVID, rather than semaglutide.
- shadowtree 2y ago[flagged]
- thund 2y agoDifferent damages, one is on blood vessels, the other on optic nerve
- amelius 2y ago> NAION is damage to the optic nerve of the eye caused by a sudden stop of blood flow to the optic nerve. Sounds like it's related to blood flow also. (Didn't read remainder of article)
- infermore 2y agosomeone should do a study to determine whether diabetics develop blindness more often when on ozempic perhaps this is that study
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- munchler 2y agoYes, this is that study: “Patients with type 2 diabetes who are treated with the drug Ozempic have an increased risk of developing damage to the optic nerve of the eye.”
- yen223 2y ago> In Jakob Grauslund’s study, the researchers divided the patients into two groups: those who were treated with Ozempic and those who received other treatment. In the statistical analyses, age, gender, blood sugar and a wide range of other conditions were also taken into account. They are comparing patients with diabetes in both groups
- LeSaucy 2y agoInteresting synchronicity of seeing this article. I just had an optometrist appointment this morning and my glasses prescription updated/renewed. The only medication I am on is Ozempic for weight management, ~8 months, lost ~40 lbs so far. My old prescription was -1.75 / -1.0 (about 5 years ago), and my new one is -0.5, -0.5. My optometrist said it was unusual but likely due to having blood glucose under control as it changes the blood pressure and shape of your eyes slightly.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y agoIsn't that an improvement, in your case?
- emptiestplace 2y agoSounds like three or four to me.
- ddmf 2y agoHow old are you? I'm almost 50 and in the last year my long distance vision has improved however I need stronger reading glasses and find it tricky to do closeup work. I was on mounjaro between Feb and Sep this year.
- ooooozeeeempik 2y ago[flagged]
- pluc 2y agoIf I know anything about America, they're gonna work at finding a remedy for blindness instead of getting on a treadmill. Just like they won't fix school shootings by implementing gun control but will talk for days about motives. They always try and fix the consequence of the problem and not the problem, it's pretty funny to watch from the outside.
- Fernicia 2y agoVaccines? Toothpaste? Laser eye surgery? Cataract surgery?
- jessfyi 2y agoThe cases of NAION observed post-Ozempic usage in Denmark is 150 (up from 60-75) out of 424,152 patients, for a rare ailment that already affects patients specifically with diabetes. Sorry to say those taking it as a "shortcut" in your words are even less susceptible. As someone who's been fortunate enough to be fit and able to work out their entire life, not sure how there are people like you who shun and shame those trying to gain a semblance of control over their weight in a world where it does have a real impact whether they get serious medical attention or not. Your likely skewed thoughts on vanity be damned, bigger people are treated worse across the board and GLP-1 is a genuine salve.
- suzzer99 2y agoIt drives me nuts when these things say stuff like "doubles your risk" w/o giving the original risk. Risk doubling from 5% to 10% is not in the same universe as risk doubling from .02% to .04%, which I believe is the actual risk in this case.
- akira2501 2y agoIn terms of outcome, it maybe a tolerable risk, but anything that flat out doubles the risk ratio is fairly concerning; in particular, where the mechanisms are not well understood.
- yen223 2y agoWhen the numbers were small to begin with, a doubled risk ratio could just be the result of statistical noise. You are right in that the mechanisms may not be well-understood. This does warrant further study, as the paper concludes.
- whimsicalism 2y agothe studies obviously adjusted for variance when considering if their conclusions are significant, you're beating up a strawman
- operator-name 2y agoAll medications increases the risks of side effects, but they are prescribed because the benifits outweigh the downsides - even if little is known about their mechanism.
- akira2501 2y ago> but they are prescribed because the benifits outweigh the downsides Some are. Some are simply prescribed because the patient asks for them. > even if little is known about their mechanism. I wouldn't take it unless my condition was immediately life threatening and there were no other medications available. There are very few classes of treatment that fall within these parameters.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sincerecook 2y agoI really don't like these medicines that give people who indulge themselves excessively an easy way out. Maybe these side effects are nature's price for not doing the work.
- cthalupa 2y agoWell, let's not give you any medication for any disease you are afflicted with. It's an easy way out. Get a bacterial infection? Should have been cleaner. Get a virus? Why you expose yourself. Develop cancer? We know there are millions of lifestyle choices that push the needle towards development bit by tiny bit, why didn't you avoid all of those? All of these are nature's price for not doing the work. Why are you taking the easy way out to discuss this on the internet? Why not go talk to someone about it in person. But don't drive, or wear clothing made by others, or live in a home constructed with modern methods using modern materials. Or... This could be a ridiculously awful take. Convenience or the "easy way out" is one of the biggest drivers of technological advancement in human history. The fact you are able to make this post at all means you have been a beneficiary of the "easy way out" in countless ways. All you're actually doing here is moralizing about fat people.
- sincerecook 2y agoCatching a disease is not the same as willfully and knowingly overeating to the point of obesity. That is a very poor comparison.
- anon22981 2y agoSod off. Your take on overweight being ”willfully and knowingly overeating” is ignorant and naive beyond recourse.
- sincerecook 2y agoThere's nothing ignorant about it, you don't get to be obese by accident. Sorry, that's just the truth.