This is a ridiculous comment. Statistically, there is no weight loss strategy that has been found to work long term at the population level except for bariatric surgery (and now, apparently, these drugs, but we'll see how things look in a few years). Sure, one individual person can pull it off with enough willpower and support and luck. But at a population level, we know definitively that "grind it out with exercise, nutrition, and therapy" is not an effective public health strategy.
We are biochemical machines that evolved in a food environment completely unlike the modern world, and that's before you get into possible chemical factors in the environment. If these drugs continue to prove safe—or even they just prove to be less bad than obesity and more effective than other techniques—then there's no reason to dismiss them.
Congratulations on being better than the rest of us slobs, but what works for you may not work for everyone.
Never said I'm better. My point is that these solutions are driven by people looking for easy answers to a hard problem. I refuse to believe people need them but only want them and that may be enough for some.
You're free to come to that conclusion but that is not my intention. I'm not a better person than OP but I'm arguing there is a better way to attain their goals.
> But at a population level, we know definitively that "grind it out with exercise, nutrition, and therapy" is not an effective public health strategy.
I'm pretty sure most people skip the therapy. Maybe that's the problem. Changing your relationship with your lifestyle and your food involves a commitment to changing yourself.
Were I in that position, I'd be more inclined to try psychedelics to change how I think than I would new drugs that mess with metabolism.
Another tack we could take is to change the available food options and tax the hell out of problematic foods and heavily subsidize healthier foods. That's a population-level policy that will almost certainly have long term population level effects.
The carnivore diet (eat only liver, eggs, and ribeye steaks, and drink only water) would work to cure obesity at a population level. It would also end chronic disease in society.
Maybe losing weight the old fashioned way builds character, but so do plenty of other things. Living as a subsistence farmer also probably builds character because you’re taking an active role in producing food that maintains your body.
Instead I choose to take advantage of technology to provide food and shelter, so that I can use the extra time to focus on other pursuits.
I agree with this for overweight people, but for obese people, the chance that they will follow the "right" way is near zero.
The alternative comes down to being obese (which is a death sentence) or medical interventions. It's true that this only solves the symptoms and not the actual problem, but it will probably save lives.
Whether it's a pill a day or a run, you are still doing something and thus the journey. Some of us are blessed with hands-off metabolisms and some of us, it's a constant battle. Best of luck to you tho.
>I'm not sure at what point in your life weight management was lauded as "easy". You have some tools in your toolbox on how to lose weight naturally (diet, exercise, different eating cycles) but you decided that these are too "hard" and opted for magic pills.
Why shouldn't technology make it easy?
>Just a shame to see people make progress in their weight loss journey the right(er) ways then succumb to weakness and opt for voodoo.
