health

U.S. approves highly anticipated Eli Lilly weight loss drug

39 Comments
By Issam AHMED

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

© 2023 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

70% obese, yowza

4 ( +5 / -1 )

MichaelBukakisToday 07:53 am JST

70% obese, yowza

Obese or overweight, thank you. Part of living the American dream and not completely sarcastic at that. The UK isn't far behind.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Weight loss drug.... that's just ridiculous... unless you have a condition, thyroid issues etc. I can't get why people resort to drugs or even lipo surgeries if all you had to do was to keep your mouth shut.

People in their 30s doing their groceries in motorized shopping carts because they are too fat to even walk around is something I will never understand, totally surreal anywhere else.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

field of powerful -- and lucrative -- new obesity medicines.

...and dangerous.

There was a very recent case of a woman who took one of these drugs to lose weight for her daughter's wedding; it killed her.

They come with serious side effects, and they don't make you healthier, even when they work as intended.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Weight loss drug.... that's just ridiculous... unless you have a condition, thyroid issues etc. I can't get why people resort to drugs or even lipo surgeries if all you had to do was to keep your mouth shut.

That is because of complete lack of empathy and irrationally thinking everybody is the same as you, equivalent to not understanding alcoholism, smoking or any other addiction.

...and dangerous.

Much less dangerous than what the failure to lose weight represent, which is why they are approved.

There was a very recent case of a woman who took one of these drugs to lose weight for her daughter's wedding; it killed her.

N=1 anecdotal evidence is not enough to refute the benefits obtained from their use to treat patients having extreme difficulties to lose weight.

They come with serious side effects, and they don't make you healthier, even when they work as intended.

Yes they do, excessive weight is a well proved cause of several risks for the health, losing that extra weight is an excellent argument to prove patients under treatment are much more healthy than those that instead failed the life-style change.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

They come with serious side effects, and they don't make you healthier, even when they work as intended.

Yes they do, excessive weight is a well proved cause of several risks for the health, losing that extra weight is an excellent argument to prove patients under treatment are much more healthy than those that instead failed the life-style change.

Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs doesn't.

Many fail in their life-style change attempts because they are not being properly advised.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs doesn't.

This article explicitly says it does, just claiming the study is false without offering any proof is just a baseless accusation.

Many fail in their life-style change attempts because they are not being properly advised.

And many fall even with the best possible advice, for those patients drugs can importantly reduce the risks to their health.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs doesn't.

This article explicitly says it does,

It does? Where? Are you referring to the "stomach paralysis, pancreatitis and bowel obstruction", or perhaps the "nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, constipation, abdominal discomfort and pain, injection site reactions, fatigue, allergic reactions, burping, hair loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease", or maybe the "thyroid C-cell tumors".

Many fail in their life-style change attempts because they are not being properly advised.

And many fall even with the best possible advice, for those patients drugs can importantly reduce the risks to their health.

I doubt many have failed on a carnivore diet.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It does? Where?

You said the drugs did not make people lose weight, trying to deflect is not going to make that go away, the evidence clearly points out that the benefits obtained from the use of the drugs hugely outweigh the risks, so for those patients for which doctors consider will benefit from these drugs the choice is between infrequent and easily identified (since the treatment is under medical vigilance) negative side effects or the full risks that come from obesity.

You still have not shown evidence this very positive ratio of costs/benefits is not real, just that you don't want to accept it, which is of course not a rational argument.

I doubt many have failed on a carnivore diet.

Many fail to any diet, specially one with big controversies about risks and limited benefits. If it were as good and simple as you try to misrepresent no country would have any obesity problems, much less the US.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

You said the drugs did not make people lose weight,

How could you interpret my comment that way? We've had this discussion before.

Here, I'll reword it to make it clearer: Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs don't improve one's health.

All the article is saying is that being overweight is bad, implying that reducing it in any way possible must be good. With that logic, one could say that chopping one's legs off must be good because it reduces your weight.

I previously mentioned people looked at muscles scans of people taking these drugs, and the effects were not positive.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Here, I'll reword it to make it clearer: Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs don't improve one's health.

Repeating a baseless claim do not correct the fundamental problem of you not proving that claim with any evidence.

If the drugs make people lose weight then it can validly be assumed to improve their health since being overweight bring risks that these people will no longer have. To say this is not true you need to bring a reference to prove it, just repeating that you believe it is not enough.

All the article is saying is that being overweight is bad, implying that reducing it in any way possible must be good. 

No, that is not a valid assumption, the article is focused on the approval by the FDA of the treatment on the basis of the benefits it brings to patients. To deny this you would again need evidence this is not the case, not a personal belief about it.

I previously mentioned people looked at muscles scans of people taking these drugs, and the effects were not positive.

The problems is that you tried to ignore that people that lose weight by caloric restriction also lose muscles, and you did that because once again you could not support your claim that the muscle loss by pharmacological treatment was in any way worse than without it. Repeating that claim without addressing the counter argument means it is still debunked.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

"Weight loss drug.... that's just ridiculous... unless you have a condition, thyroid issues etc. I can't get why people resort to drugs or even lipo surgeries if all you had to do was to keep your mouth shut."

I agree, unless other health conditions are at play, it is mostly a matter of having a strong enough mind to push oneself to eat less/ better balanced food and exercise more. Caveat as I said, unless..

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I agree, unless other health conditions are at play, it is mostly a matter of having a strong enough mind to push oneself to eat less/ better balanced food and exercise more. 

This way of thinking is exactly what brought the US and other countries to their current health crisis, and it is something that has been abandoned by the professionals in the field as a reductionist, incomplete and ineffective way to see the problem. Relying on "strong will" is not a solution for a problem so complicated and difficult as the overweight epidemic.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Always the best way is to eat a better diet and increase exercise. However for some like the disabled this is easier said than done.

Anything that can help should be welcomed though things like this and gastric bands should be a last resort.

A lot of the blame for obesity in the US is from misinformation from the FDA over the decades and the food pyramid that was manipulated by corporations which made FDA advice poor and dangerous.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Of the 70% of individuals in America who are perceived to be obese or overweight, what percentage are actually just big boned?

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Still, the best and healthiest way to weight loss is exercise and eating properly. It's cheaper than this new drug, which is backed by the FDA.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Of the 70% of individuals in America who are perceived to be obese or overweight, what percentage are actually just big boned?

A fraction, all these fatsos simply can't put the fork down.

To the point of relying on motorized carts Wall-e style.

Last winter I gained like 20 pounds and that was enough to give me backache and even getting short of breath by going up a long flight of stairs. 2 weeks and problem solved. These people are just lazy.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Exercise and diet are the best ways to lose weight. Most drugs usually fail in the end. I lost 5 kg this summer. Looking for another 5.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Wallace

Good achievement mate, well dine. Hope you’re recovering from the virus or whatever you’ve had recently.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Still, the best and healthiest way to weight loss is exercise and eating properly. It's cheaper than this new drug, which is backed by the FDA.

Not only cheaper but also much more prone to fail completely, which is why the situation in the US is a disaster without any solution for the foreseeable future. The drugs end up being healthier than just pretending willpower make things better, simply because it actually works and reduce the risks. Also approving a drug once the developers did all the work to investigate it and prove it is safe and effective can't be called "backing" it.

 These people are just lazy.

This kind of arbitrary judgments are not useful to solve the problem, which is why actual professionals working to control the epidemic do not reduce the problem invalidly this way and instead work very hard developing ways to actually deal with the problem. Of course if the purpose is not to offer solutions but to feel better criticizing other people this have no importance.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Watch the rates of obesity and overweight skyrocket as people learn they can eat and laze themselves into unhealthiness

So you think the population would consider an extra $1,000 a month (and the extra costs of the new life-style) something that they can spend without a second thought?

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

gcFd1 Today 03:34 pm JST

Still, the best and healthiest way to weight loss is exercise and eating properly.

wallace Today 03:42 pm JST

Exercise and diet are the best ways to lose weight.

Yeah, but all that requires personal responsibility and effort on my part. As you should know from the mandatory “coffee is hot” labels to mandatory bicycle helmet laws, the concept of individuals taking personal responsibility is passé and now it is all about letting the government take care of everything.

virusrex Today 05:19 pm JST

So you think the population would consider an extra $1,000 a month (and the extra costs of the new life-style) something that they can spend without a second thought?

Why not? I mean, once that sweet Universal Basic Income comes rolling in. . .

0 ( +3 / -3 )

fatrainfallingintheforest Today 05:45 pm JST

It's going to be stars and starlets preparing for shoots and people looking to lose 20 pounds for beaches, weddings and pool parties.

You say that like its a bad thing! Oh the future's so bright, I gotta wear shades!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If you don't put it in you don't put it on. Just stop eating to many of the wrong food, cut carbs especially pure carbs like sugar, white rice, pasta and white bread and not forgetting potatoes. There's no way I'd inject some drug just because I can't control my greed.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

What are the side effects of this new drug? I rather be well fed than look like a twig that can blow over

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Why not? I mean, once that sweet Universal Basic Income comes rolling in. . .

You mean why not do the same amount of exercise and diet they would still have to do right now but paying extra money? I think that is self explanatory. And if everybody is losing weight by doing this why would rates skyrocket then?

It's going to be stars and starlets preparing for shoots and people looking to lose 20 pounds for beaches, weddings and pool parties.

As a rule? not likely at all, specially because this is to be used under medical vigilance and because there is enough market for this in the US to make celebrities a tiny minority.

Just stop eating to many of the wrong food

And to solve alcoholism just don't drink, and smoking is solved as easily by not doing it, right? simplisticl non-solutions is why the US is in such a disastrous situation in the first place.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Not based in any fact; pure personal opinion.

Nothing personal in the FDA approving the drug because of their proven benefits, nor the disastrous situation with obesity in the US, that has been repeatedly reported, enough to make it now common knowledge.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

And to solve alcoholism just don't drink, and smoking is solved as easily by not doing it, right?

If you don't want to burn your hand, don't touch the flame. It's actually that simple.

simplisticl non-solutions is why the US is in such a disastrous situation in the first place.

That is just your personal opinion, with no scientific basis. Laughable too.

Nothing personal in the FDA approving the drug because of their proven benefits, nor the disastrous situation with obesity in the US, that has been repeatedly reported, enough to make it now common knowledge.

Anyone want to decipher this?

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

"Simple" solutions that don't solve anything are not solutions at all. The situation in the US is a very clear example of what it means to follow advice that do not improve things. Both the reliance on those non-solutions and the huge health disaster the US is currently experiencing are well described and not just personal opinions.

Anyone want to decipher this?

That is much more productive than just assume something is meaningless, asking for explanations for things you could not understand will allow for this lack of undertanding to be corrected. There are at least two other people that had no problem with the comment.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Yes, losing weight the right way improves one's health. But using these drugs don't improve one's health.

The medical consensus supports the same.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The medical consensus supports the same

That would still be wrong, the fact that the drugs have been approved means the failure of following treatment (which the drugs help prevent) represents a much higher risk than what the drugs have on their own. The consensus do not support the claim made.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

That would still be wrong, the fact that the drugs have been approved means the failure of following treatment (which the drugs help prevent) represents a much higher risk than what the drugs have on their own. The consensus do not support the claim made.

The actual medical consensus is correct, but interesting to hear your out of the industry belief.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The actual medical consensus is correct, but interesting to hear your out of the industry belief

The consensus is correct it just do not support the claim maid, as easily as you just keep repeating that claim without providing a source that says the drug approval is not justified.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The point is that even with their risks the drug is still a much better option for the patients than the alternative which is a much higher risk of failure losing weight which brings much higher dangers to their health than the infrequent problems attributable to the drugs.

That's not the point of the medical consensus.

And in addition to the risks to health, the drugs are also more expensive than the best and healthiest solution advised by the medical professionals:

Zepbound comes with a high list price of $1,059.87 per month,

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

That's not the point of the medical consensus.

That is precisely the point, which is why the drugs have been approved. To refute this you had to make up a claim nobody has made, this clearly shows you understand the actual consensus is that the drugs are much more beneficial than letting the patients fail.

And in addition to the risks to health, the drugs are also more expensive than the best and healthiest solution advised by the medical professionals:

That claim is also wrong, not only because letting patients fail much more frequently is not the best nor the healthiest, but because obesity by itself has a lot of economic impact even if you try to ignore it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Change your lifestyle to lose weight. Move a little every day (30-60 minutes) and eat 80% of your food from veggies. You will lose weight. But it isn't "convenient" to do these things. Most Americans shop for food weekly or bi-weekly, not daily, so getting fresh veggies isn't part of the built-in lifestyle.

OTOH, having 2 weeks of food at home means when a pandemic happens, staying home isn't too hard, unlike in some other cultures. I suppose people who live in NYC are used to shopping for food a few times each week. Places where people don't need vehicles probably shop much more often.

Lifestyle changes, not a pill.

It might eventually cure the common cold, but lengthen lives? Poppycock! I can do more for you if you just eat right and exercise regularly.

-- Dr. McCoy (aka Bones)

0 ( +0 / -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