Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
health

Powerful new obesity drug poised to upend weight loss care

47 Comments
By JONEL ALECCIA

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

47 Comments
Login to comment

Amazing that we have come to this: drugs to stop us eating so much. Is there no limit to human ingenuity? And foolishness?

7 ( +14 / -7 )

First, we should just learn to eat properly and have a healthy lifestyle.

9 ( +13 / -4 )

gokai_wo_manekuToday  08:13 am JST

First, we should just learn to eat properly and have a healthy lifestyle.

That's a little unfair. Pharma shareholders are probably relying on the income from drugs like this to pay for their burger and Diet Coke habit.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Amazing that we have come to this: drugs to stop us eating so much. Is there no limit to human ingenuity? And foolishness?

What is so surprising about it? medical interventions have been used for centuries to fight against natural responses and instincts that can act negatively against a healthy outcome. Fever, pain, nausea, anxiety or fear for example can be much more damaging than helpul even if completely "natural".

The drugs of the article do not replace diet and excercise, they simply make these lifestyle changes more effective at controlling the weight. They are acting to reduce a very powerful physiological response that acts against losing weigh even when it would be healthier to do it.

The most important part is that these drugs are being used while under medical supervision and that they are still being examined for any kind of hidden risks or disadvantages (like the rebound mentioned in the article) this helps a lot in the determination if patients should be able to use them or not, because sticking to a traditional (and likely to fail) method to lose weight also comes with risks for their health.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Well, virusrex, we all have individual responses to news and my own was amazement. Perhaps it is more about the wider context of the invention than the invention itself. As perhaps the subsequent questions alluded to.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The real truth on more serious side effects will come out later when people start dropping off.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Prevention is far better than the cure, and these drugs send the message that you can eat as much as you like and exercise as little as you like, and medicate the consequences away later.

That would apply to all other drugs as well, from anti-diabetes drugs to painkillers, people in theory can always get the invalid message that they can disregard their health and just treat later. In reality public health services usually focus a lot on prevention and there is nothing that means these efforts could not be even reinforced by the lower demands from a healthier population thanks to weight loss. Should other drugs in use be restricted to send a stronger message of prevention?

Is that what this part, from the article, means?

That would be a problem if the health care providers are not keeping track of the patients, but telemedicine do not mean proper follow up is not done and patients specific risks ignored. Other drugs with serious risks but also important benefits on the treatment of chronic health problems are being distributed in this way.

The real truth on more serious side effects will come out later when people start dropping off.

Do you have any evidence for this? or is it as likely as finding out the drugs have not yet discovered important extra benefits for the patients?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

The perfect answer for the " Its not my fault, my glands make me eat like a pig crowd."

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Well said Moonraker.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

If the problem they treat is self-inflicted, by, for example, eating too much and moving around too little, then yeah. 

Most chronic diseases would fit that definition, good luck convincing health providers that your very restrictive idea of how to deal with those diseases would work improving public health. In reality this would simply make a lot of people sicker and likely to die much sooner because of a twisted priority.

I mean, even antibiotics could be included in this way of thinking, so refusing to treat infections would of course work wonders (according to you) in promoting preventive measures to avoid getting infected in the same way, so would be not giving any treatment to cancer patients that have not had "enough" screenings to prevent finding their disease above the earliest stages, etc. According to you less medical interventions automatically gets translated to better prevention, based on nothing but that you want to believe this is the case.

Take off the rose-tinted glasses.

If you want to make the claim remote providers are not taking care of the patients you need to prove that claim first before calling other people for not just believing you. You believing something is happening is not the same as actually proving it.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Amazing that we have come to this: drugs to stop us eating so much. Is there no limit to human ingenuity? And foolishness?

Agreed.

Better to use self discipline than expose oneself to health risks associated with these medicines.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Barlow, a 48-year-old health technology executive, said he has lost more than 100 pounds since November by using the drug Mounjaro and changing his diet

He looks no different. £100 is a rip off. I'd ask for my money back.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Industry analysts predict that tirzepatide could become one of the top-selling drugs ever, with annual sales topping $50 billion. 

APPROVED

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Yep, the diarrhea side effect will certainly help you lose weight!

5 ( +5 / -0 )

But, this drug will not fit well with the social justice industry.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/26/author-claims-fat-bias-promotes-white-supremacy-patriarchy/

From the article:

“Obviously, white supremacy is trying to maintain the power structure. So celebrating a thin white body as the ideal body is a way to ‘other’ and demonize black and brown bodies, bigger bodies, anyone who doesn’t fit into that norm. So this is really about maintaining systems of white supremacy and patriarchy.”

There won’t be much of a market in Japan, where white supremacy is apparently rampant.

Its obvious target market is the US. The US food industry has done a masterful job of making it easy to be fat. Fat people buy more food.

The government promotes Frosted Mini-Wheats as diet food. All deli meats, ham, beef, turkey, chicken, in grocery stores are laden with sugar. Who the hell puts sugar in meat? The food industry, that’s who, to make everyone fat so they buy more food.

I’m an old, non-fat, disabled Vietnam veteran with a permanent handicap license plate. I can barely walk, but can’t get a parking spot because they’re all taken by giant fat people, since being fat is now a handicap.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Though the drugs appear safe, they can cause side effects, some serious. Most common reactions include diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, constipation and stomach pain. Some users have developed pancreatitis or inflammation of the pancreas, others have had gallbladder problems. Mounjaro’s product description warns that it could cause thyroid tumors, including cancer.

Why would people sign up to take a drug with these outcomes for the rest of their lives?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why would people sign up to take a drug with these outcomes for the rest of their lives?

They are not sure nor common outcomes, at least the more serious ones, else the drug won't be approved.

Anyway, people have done far far a lot more riskier things for beauty.

Going under the knife for what can be considered as major surgeries are common, for example

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So you can still eat all the rubbish that got you in that condition in the first place. And the companies can sell even more fat-laden, sugar-laden, high-calorie-laden JUNK. It's a win, win, win. The fat person gets to stuff his face and lose weight.WIN! The company gets to put more fat, and sugar in their food to increase their profits,WIN and the government get to PICK UP THE TAB (LOSE) for this drug and get the sales tax and gain from the profits. The medical service is at the bottom of the run, where companies and the gov understand that bad food and bad health are forced onto a health service which is expected to do more with less. We weren't like this in the 50s and 60s, and the only thing that has changed is the acceptance of fat people and the pushing of JUNK onto people for profit.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So true. Seeing a fat person was rare 50 years ago. People gain weight as they grow older, but nowhere near the monstrous blobs waddling around now.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The article didn't mention that it makes your hair fall out.

No worries, they'll sell you another new drug to make it grow back.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

So you are saying that no one in the medical field thinks that never developing a life threatening condition is preferable to treating that life threatening condition with expensive drugs that have serious side effects? Okay.

No, I am saying your suggestion that making treatment more difficult is not an effective way to promote prevention which is clearly understood from the comment, and that the observed failure of treatment brings much more sirks of life treatening conditions than any of the drugs mentioned in the article.

Because it's better than the alternative. Diet and exercise.

The article clearly mentions that there is no alternative, the drugs facilitate the lifestyle changes for a much better outcome, it do not replace them. The actual alternative is a failure of treatment that comes with much higher risks for the health of the patients.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

You have to give the pharmacies credit for selling these drugs to the masses,and convincing them it is the only alternative. It is obvious that medical professionals preach the best approach is to not get these diseases in the first place and to adopt a lifestyle encouraging that.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

You have to give the pharmacies credit for selling these drugs to the masses,and convincing them it is the only alternative

Nothing in the article says they are the only alternative, just much better than pretending willpower will lead to a successful treatment, something that has been already proved false during whole decades of trying it.

You have to give the pharmacies credit for selling these drugs to the masses,and convincing them it is the only alternative

Which have done absolutely nothing to prevent the current crisis. It is also completely irrelevant because treatment do not require at all to stop preventive efforts, just facilitate the treatment when those efforts fail, which is something that happens frequently. The choice is not between preventing or treating the disease, the choice is between the risk of treating it effectively when prevention fails or letting treatment fails and have much higher risks for the health of the patients.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

The medical professionals do not "pretend" that willpower will lead to successful treatment. The medical professionals "know" that by implementing willpower into better eating and exercising that many of these diseases never manifest. It's such a basic concept. Willpower to give up smoking cigarettes leads to not smoking cigarettes, Realky elementary.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The medical professionals do not "pretend" that willpower will lead to successful treatment.

Which is why they are very exited for the development of these new medicines, because it helps changing this mistaken view that people uninvolved in the problem tend to have as it has become clear in the comments.

The experts in the field say something very different

“They have entirely changed the landscape,” said Dr. Amy Rothberg, a University of Michigan endocrinologist who directs a virtual weight loss and diabetes program.

Obviously they don't think that the drugs are not necessary and much more effective than not using them.

 The medical professionals "know" that by implementing willpower into better eating and exercising that many of these diseases never manifest. 

And again, this approach has failed spectacularly in the decades leading to the current situation, so a drug that can support this without relying on willpower as if it was a magical force that was efficient in the treatment is a much better option.

Willpower to give up smoking cigarettes leads to not smoking cigarettes, Realky elementary.

And it has the same problem, "willpower" is a terribly ineffective way to stop smoking, which makes the different pharmacological interventions to support the treatment of this addiction an important benefit, even when all these treatments have risks of their own, it is simply that not using them have much more risks for the health of the patients.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

The pharmaceutical companies are upbeat about these drugs but as someone with physicians in the family, I know more than a few doctors that would prefer their patients not have to rely on these kind of drugs that provide relatively short term relief.

One of the first things a doctor asks their patients over the age of 35 is, How often and how much do you walk everyday?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The pharmaceutical companies are upbeat about these drugs but as someone with physicians in the family, I know more than a few doctors that would prefer their patients not have to rely on these kind of drugs that provide relatively short term relief.

Appeals to authority by proxy is nothing more than hearsay, specially from anonymous accounts.

The argument is not if it is better to use drugs or get the results without them, the argument in this article is that the drugs greatly increase the efficacy of the treatment when compared with not using them.

Just saying that doctors prefer their patients to fail their treatments and get much higher risks for their health do not make it an argument.

Do you have any reference where a doctor says it is preferable for a patient to have a much higher failure rate and that this would put them in less risk?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

The pharma companies are making out great, and pity the doctors whose advice to patients is to exercise and change eating habits. It is statistically proven that patients with consistent exercise regimes have lower rates of diabetes, obesity, and other diseases. And what are the negative side effects of exercise?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

These drugs certainly are upending weight loss care. More like turning it upside down.

Does anyone actually dispute that a doctor recommends exercise and a change to their diet to their patients who might be obese or on the verge of diabetes?

Mistaking this common sense as an "appeal to authority" highlights the inability to understand a basic tenet of Western medicine.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The pharma companies are making out great, and pity the doctors whose advice to patients is to exercise and change eating habits

So you pity doctors that now have a tool to make sure their patients are much more likely to obey those recommendations and lose weight successfully? what is next, pity the children that are able to survive diseases thanks to vaccines?

  And what are the negative side effects of exercise?

You keep misrepresenting the actual differences that the drugs make, they do not replace excercise, it is still necessary for patients undergoing treatment, the drugs simply make it easier to be successful by doing it, the "negative side effects" being prevented are those that come from the frequent failure to achieve a therapeutic success by relying solely on willpower.

These drugs certainly are upending weight loss care. More like turning it upside down.

Again, do you have any reference of a medical professional saying so? because those in this article do not share that negative view and instead are very happy to have extra tools for the treatment. What evidence do you have to say they are wrong by doing it?

Does anyone actually dispute that a doctor recommends exercise and a change to their diet to their patients who might be obese or on the verge of diabetes?

As already explained the last time you made this misrepresentation, what is being disputed is the position that drugs that make excercise and diet easier to do and more likely to succeed are worse than not using them, the article clearly explains why this is not the case.

Mistaking this common sense as an "appeal to authority" highlights the inability to understand a basic tenet of Western medicine.

The claim you make is that doctors prefer a higher chance of failure than using the drugs, and you tried to make an invalid appeal to authority from hearsay. Unless you can present a source that says what you claimed then that claims is still baseless and not something that can be used as an argument.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Does anyone actually dispute that a doctor recommends exercise and a change to their diet to their patients who might be obese or on the verge of diabetes?

No one in their right mind would dispute this.

This is basic medicine, unless someone can prove otherwise with evidence.

Obviously treating obesity with exercise and by eating right is preferable to drugs, which have side effects including death. A successful regimen that excludes pharmaceuticals leads to a healthier life.

Anyone have incontrovertible evidence, or are they brainwashed by the pharmaceutical companies?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Again, do you have any reference of a medical professional saying so? 

Here's the Mayo Clinic saying what the doctors' treatment for obesity is:

All weight-loss programs require **changes in your eating habits and increased physical activity. **

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/obesity/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20375749

Nothing about drugs, which the pharma companies push.

I'll follow the doctor's advice--they get paid the same whether they tell someone to exercise or to take drugs.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Nothing about drugs, which the pharma companies push.

Your own link refutes the claim that doctors prefer to let their patients run higher risks because of a treatment more likely to fail than using drugs to increase the efficacy of that treatment. It literally says that medication is used together with diet and exercise and not to replace them.

When you feel the need to misrepresent a source and say it does not mention drugs, while anybody visiting the link can easily see how they are clearly included, it makes clear you are not trying to actually discuss the topic of the article. The drugs are used to treat patients of obesity with diet and exercise, not instead of it.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

virusrexToday  06:26 am JST

Your own link refutes the claim that doctors prefer to let their patients run higher risks because of a treatment more likely to fail than using drugs to increase the efficacy of that treatment. 

Mate some advice--when you try and characterize what a physician says as " appeal to authority" you are half correct--because the physician is the authority.

And the Mayo Clinic is a respected medical site that employs thousands of physicians.

According to that link, it confirms that doctors tell their obese patients to change their eating habits and to exercise. To try and say otherwise just shows a lack of common understanding of a physicians job.

My father is a medical doctor. So again, if he suggests his obese patients change their diet and increase exercise, in line with what the Mayo Clinic suggests, do you still want to try and say that advice is wrong?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Logical and factual. No argument warranted.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I'm following the experts' advice if I ever get on the verge of obesity---exercise and improve my diet.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Lots of long term undetermined side effects so I will stick with the doctors' basic advice.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The US has a very serious problem with obesity with a 68% rate caused by overeating, contaminated foods, and under-exercising. They also take too many pills already.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites