What should we think about weight-loss drugs?

Weight-loss drugs like Ozempic are transforming our health culture, but their rise also exposes how deeply we've normalised ultra-processed food—and how we're medicating the consequences. But then again, could these drugs offer a solution to many of our problems?

I’m sure by now you haven’t escaped the reach of weight-loss drugs. Honestly, I hear the word Ozempic or read about it at least once a day. It’s moved on from just some celebrity fad; everyday people are using it increasingly. TV, health professionals, politics – Wes Streeting suggesting it could be the key to getting more people into work. Within a year or so, the weight-loss drug is completely normalised and being hailed as a saviour, which it could be.

Now, I’m not questioning the benefits or anyone’s reason for going on weight-loss injections. I can’t – I don’t have the knowledge. But I do feel like maybe some questions could be asked, or perhaps we need to reflect slightly on the bigger picture. It seems like this is much more significant than just shedding a few pounds, but a shift in how we approach health and food. It’s as if something has been unlocked, and we’re running with it.

There is no way to argue that they don’t possess benefits: to give someone the ability to take control of their health, to lead a life with fewer complications, and to lessen the consequences of being over-weight. The headlines speak for themselves: “NHS must accelerate use of weight-loss jabs, say obesity experts”, “Obesity rates may start falling this year due to weight-loss jabs, seller says”, “Giving weight-loss jabs could bolster UK economy by £4.5bn a year, study says”. On the whole, we’re being told the jabs are good, with the occasional cautionary tale in there, because of course, with any medication, there are side effects and issues with a person taking it when they shouldn’t.

Now, new studies have shown that the weight-loss jabs could halve the risk of obesity-linked cancers. Even more surprising is that the effects of the jabs seem to go further than just dropping weight, and therefore the risks associated with obesity. This fairly ground-breaking study found that, when compared to a person who had shed weight via a gastric band operation, the weight-loss jabs were able to reduce inflammation, among other mechanisms, to cut the risk of cancer – this despite the fact that those who had the gastric band operation lost more weight.

That in itself is fairly incredible. But this is actually quite telling, because we are just finding out about these drugs as we go. Obviously, they’re completely safe and approved via the proper regulatory route. Yet there’s still a little of the unknown. When it comes to the weight-loss jab, we still don’t even know how many people are using them. We do, however, know that several millions are using them, and that is likely to significantly increase in the coming years.

We’re still discovering their effects that go further than just losing weight – in this recent case, a good result. But how do they work in the long term? Are there mental effects? I’m not scaremongering, just genuinely curious. Although I don’t agree with Wes Streeting’s dystopian suggestion that weight-loss drugs could be one option in getting more people back into work, there’s a sliver of truth in his approach – because it is predicted that the increase in these jabs could lead to a healthier workforce.

There’s a cultural effect too. Just this week, WeightWatchers filed for bankruptcy in the US. They’ve put this down to a surge in weight-loss jabs. Now, I’m sure there’s a little bit of scapegoating going on – after all, they’ve suffered an image crisis in the face of the body positivity movement. But it would be naïve to think that the millions who’ve taken up the jabs wouldn’t have once been using their services. Some snack companies have predicted that sales might slump, and they may need to adjust their products in the face of a changing market – and you’d best believe they will do anything to keep on top.

Interestingly enough, your local gym might have to change too. Some in the fitness industry have already noted the effects of the rise of weight-loss drugs. After all, some may think, “Why get a personal trainer when I could spend that money on a jab and not have to sweat?” Not only that, but some predict the actual structure of your local gym might shift – moving increasingly towards strength-based machines and away from cardio, as fewer people look to exercise for weight loss. Then again, certain weight-loss jabs have been linked to muscle loss, so the occasional trip to the gym will still be required. To a point, all of this is very speculative, but interesting all the same – because, as I said, this shift goes further than just losing weight.

But perhaps the most important question we should be asking is about our diet. Coincidentally, at the same point in time as the rise of the weight-loss jab within society, so comes the research concerning what we now refer to as ‘ultra-processed’ food. More research is revealing the effects and components of what now makes up 60% of our diet – which is rather terrifying. In all honesty, it’s best to think of ultra-processed food not as food but as an edible product. There is little to no nutritional value in these products; they are modified to within an inch of their life and are more of a marketing experiment than a culinary one.

How can we get it softer, or have that amazing crisp as you bite down, get the packaging to pop or rustle more, or even make the packaging smell so that ice cream is more enticing (this is an actual thing)? They are linked to cancer, may negatively impact fertility, and are linked to weight gain. A study which saw two groups of people, one group eating predominantly ultra-processed the other not, consume the same amount of calories and macronutrients, and move the same amount, found that the group eating ultra-processed food not only put on more weight, but it literally altered their brain chemistry and made them feel hungrier.

That’s the thing – as our average diet relies more and more on these products, they change us, and they have the opposite effect to weight-loss jabs when it comes to keeping us full. Ultra-processed foods create a spike in the hormone that tells us we’re hungry – an effect that has been studied several times. A clever trick, or perhaps coincidence, to keep you reaching for whatever you’re eating.

So what happens when we have a nation that is increasingly reaching for weight-loss jabs while also increasingly eating worse? One analysis found that after one year of stopping weight-loss jabs, the individual will return to their original weight. Perhaps that’s because we’re starting to lose sight of what a good diet is – not in relation to weight loss, but in general. These drugs don’t stop us from eating ultra-processed food – they just stop us eating as much.

Much like vaping, could this be a solution for so many, but the beginning of a new problem for others? I don’t know – but there’s a possibility. Yet it genuinely could reduce our obesity levels; it could be the preventative marvel that many believe it to be. 

This could go further than just what equipment is in your gym but how we view obesity and food; is obesity all about personal choice, when these drugs could help those who are a little less deficient in the hormone that keeps you feeling fuller for longer. Yet, is it safe to carry on creating this society that encourages a poor diet, that makes taking a healthier option harder or more expensive. To have foods deceive us and include chemicals that you might struggle to pronounce, never mind know what they are. So do we stop trying to solve the harder problem of creating a better environment, and just focus on the drugs as a mean of side-stepping the consequences?

There is still so much more to investigate, which I’m sure we will.