Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Weight Loss Miracle Drug: Muscle Loss Threat Exposed
Well Ted, these GLP-1 drugs like we govi and ozempic are pretty darned. Well Ted, these GLP-1 drugs like we govi and ozempic are pretty darned. We're talking about an average 14.9% weight reduction over 16 months in clinical trials for ozempic, that's not just shedding a few pounds, it's a game changer for many folks struggling with obesity. Hold your horses Eric. Those numbers might sound peachy, but we can't turn a blind eye to the long-term health risks. The big cheese over at Regeneron. Come on Kate, that's a bit dramatic don't you think? These aren't some snake oil pills we're dealing with, they've been put through the ringer with rigorous testing, the science behind them. What about the muscle loss, huh? The Regeneron CEO himself pointed out that these drugs are zapping muscle faster than your grandma can say cookie jar. Interesting points, both of you. Eric, how would you respond to this muscle loss concern? Look, any weight loss journey is going to involve some muscle loss. It's par for the course, but let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees here. The benefits of reducing obesity related health risks are massive, plus these pharma companies aren't sitting on their hands, they're already cooking up treatments to help preserve muscle mass. Oh please, that's just admitting there's a problem. We're not talking about a little muscle here and there, this is potentially a massive muscle exodus. And what happens then? People's metabolism takes a note. Now you're just fear mongering Kate. Let's look at the actual numbers here, according to clinical data, only 25% of weight loss from Eli Lilly's injections comes from lean mass for Novo Nordisk's products. It's 40%. That only 25%, only 40%. Are you hearing yourself? That's still a huge chunk of muscle going by by and let's not forget the yo-yo effect. Two out of five patients bounce back to their original weight within a year of these are all crucial points to consider. Now let's shift gears a bit and talk about the financial aspect. How accessible are these treatments? Well Ted, Wigovie is set to hit the Korean market this month. We're looking at a monthly cost of about 800,000 won, which shakes out to roughly $600 USD. Now I know that's not chump change, but for folks who've been waging a losing battle against obesity, it could be a worthwhile investment in their health and future. With Wile, are you kidding me, that's highway robbery. We're talking about a treatment that might not even work long-term and could cause serious health issues down the road. This is just another example of the problem. Let's put this in a broader context. Can either of you think of a similar situation from medical history where a popular treatment later raised concerns? Certainly, Ted. This whole situation reminds me of the fen fen controversy back in the '90s, fen fluoramine and fentermine were all the rage for weight loss until people started developing serious heart valve problems. It was a wake-up call for the industry. Exactly, and look how that turned out. Thousands of people suffered health complications and the drug was yanked off the market faster than you can say class action lawsuit. It's a perfect example of why we- Whoa, hold your horses, Kate. While fen fen is definitely a cautionary tale, it's not really a fair comparison. The drug development and approval processes nowadays are way more rigorous. These GLP-1 drugs were- But the fen fen disaster shows how initial enthusiasm can blind us to potential risks. We're seeing the same pattern here with celebrities endorsing these drugs without fully understanding the long-term consequences. Interesting comparison. Now how does the current situation differ from the fen fen case in terms of regulatory oversight? Quick question, Ted, the regulatory landscape today is a whole different ballgame. The FDA now requires much more comprehensive clinical trials and keeps a close eye on drugs even after they hit the market. These GLP-1 drugs have been put through their paces for years before getting the green light. That's all well and good, Eric. But regulations aren't some magical shield. Remember the opioid crisis? Those drugs were FDA-approved too. We need to stay on our toes and not rush headlines- Come on, Kate. You're comparing apples and oranges here. Opioids are addictive substances. These GLP-1 drugs don't have the same risk of abuse, plus they're tackling a serious health issue, obesity, which affects the- But we're potentially creating a new health crisis while trying to solve another. The muscle loss and potential for weight regain could lead to a whole new set of problems. We're talking about messing with people's metabolism. Let's look ahead. What do you see the situation unfolding in the coming years? Eric, what's your vision for the future of obesity treatment? I see a bright future, Ted. As research continues, we'll likely see improved GLP-1 drugs with fewer side effects combined with muscle preservation treatments. We could have a powerful tool against obesity. This could lead to significant reductions in obesity-related health issues and health care costs. It's not just about losing weight. It's about improving overall health and quality of life for millions of people. That's overly optimistic, Eric. I foresee a different scenario. We'll see a cycle of people losing weight rapidly, then regaining it with more body fat than before. This could lead to worse health outcomes and a population more susceptible to weight gain. You're being way too pessimistic, Kate. These drugs are just one piece of the puzzle. With proper education and lifestyle changes, people can maintain their weight loss, plus ongoing use of the medication can help prevent weight regain. It's about ongoing use. So you're advocating for people to be on these drugs indefinitely? That's not a solution. It's a lifetime dependency on pharmaceutical companies. We're talking about turning people into permanent customers. Both of you raise interesting points. Now, how do you think this will affect the health care system and insurance coverage? I believe we'll see increased coverage for these treatments as their long-term benefits become clear. Preventing obesity-related diseases could save insurers and health care systems billions in the long run. It's not just about the cost of the drugs themselves, but the potential savings from reducing heart disease, diabetes, and other obesity-related conditions. That's a dangerous path, Eric. We could see skyrocketing health care costs as people demand coverage for expensive, potentially risky treatments. Instead, we should focus on prevention through education and addressing the root causes of obesity. Prevention is important, but we can't ignore effective treatments, Kate. These drugs could be life-changing for people who've struggled with obesity for years. It's not an either-or situation. We can promote healthy lifestyles, while also- But at what cost? We're talking about potential muscle loss, metabolic changes, and unknown long-term effects. We need to prioritize safe, sustainable weight loss methods. We can't just throw pills at the problem at all. Well, this has certainly been an enlightening discussion. It's clear that while these new obesity treatments offer promising results, they also raise important questions about long-term effects and health care priorities. As with many medical advancements, time and further research will likely provide more answers. Thank you, Eric and Kate, for sharing your insights on this complex issue.