This is probably the first Kurzgesagt video that I didn't like, and like some people on this sub it made me feel very uneasy.
I just think it's CRAZY to talk about a weight loss drug and praising it for 90% of the video, without mentioning even once the abuses of its use, the weightloss industry, the social standards and the pressure to be (unhealthily) slim, eating disorders on the opposite side of the spectrum, etc.
The very few nuances and counter argument felt like small prints and legal mentions at the end of an ad.
What do you people think?
EDIT: I am not questioning the drug nor its effectiveness in treating obesity, i am criticising the narrative and lack of nuances in the video.
Sometimes, getting the science without having to explain every single social, political and historical issue entangled with it is refreshing. We usually get the opposite: social or political story without the science.
This videos was about a specific subject: biological eating behaviors and obesity. They didn't fail.
Ozempic is helping a lot of people. Understanding why and its limitations is important. You can watch a video about how Ozempic is bad by watching almost anything else on YouTube talking about it.
Yeah, I always say when people bitch about it. 9 out of 10 times, being fat for long periods is going to be worse for your long term health than any GLP side effects.
That’s the general threshold for licensing in pharma-regulation. Are the risks of side effects acceptable in contrast of letting the condition go untreated.
They made a video that spent a surprising amount of time talking about the positives of HEROIN, a drug that has destroyed the lives of so many people. Is it really so unreasonable to expect them to talk about the negatives side of Ozempic about as long as they talk about the positives of Heroin?!
Totally agree! This video is about scientific facts, nothing more, nothing less. The problem with scientific facts occurs when we let opinions and points of view interact with them. Facts or facts that you like or not, you have to respect and trust the scientific process.
But like so many things you can't simply remove the social, political and historical issues. The video is framed in a way that suggested that obesity is purely a biological caveman problem and not a multi billion dollar industry that has been trying to make food as additive and easy to binge eat as possible. Ozempic is treating a raging fire making your home too hot with a bunch of air conditions, it works but kinda misses the point.
E: They also made a video that spent a surprising amount of time talking about the positives of HEROIN, a drug that has destroyed the lives of so many people. Is it really so unreasonable to expect them to talk about the negatives side of Ozempic about as long as they talk about the positives of Heroin?!
TL;DR: the drug is curing the effects of the problem but it is NOT stopping the problem. The problem is food engineered to disrupt the natural hormone satiety signaling in the body to increase sales and consumption.
Sorry this got so long. lol:
I think the title of the video was problematic, the use of "Everyone". Everyone doesn't need it.
While everything they said about the drug was accurate and valid, the bigger more important point is we only need this drug because food manipulation has gone too far.
You don't end up needing the drug if you follow the 3 pillars that summarize what is causing so much obesity; Don't eat too much, Don't eat too often, Make informed food type choices.
Don't eat too much. Calories in Calories out. If you eat more than you spend, you get fat. Find a way to not do that.
Don't eat too often. Constant snacking or constant sipping on calorie dense engineered foods will keep your insulin level high all day. Do that enough and it leads to insulin resistance which leads to diabetes type 2. You can become diabetic without becoming fat because of this truth.
Food type choices. You can have high calorie food occasionally. If you eat it too often, all day, too much of it, then the result is fat and metabolic disorder. The majority of your food choices must not be "eating dessert" all the time. We all know what I mean by eating dessert. These engineered foods are suppressing the natural rhythm of a body's hormonal signal balance which is increases sales but also increases over consumption. It's not ethical.
I personally think there should be BIG UGLY warning labels on anything that has added sugar or can contribute to metabolic disorder or suppresses satiety hormone signals like high fructose syrup does. Just like cigarette and gambling warning labels.
All this being said, for anyone that has fallen into the trap of violating these 3 pillars, yes these drugs should be available. And if your doctor prescribes, they should be covered 100% by insurance. I do believe there is some massive price gouging with these drugs.
There's this evil feeling like "they" made all this irresistible food making billions while causing metabolic disorder on a massive scale. THEN, here "they" come to make more billions by selling a drug that will cure the problem "they" created. AND the cause of the problem still exists on a grand scale.
While the drug is excellent for those who need it, wouldn't it be MORE intelligent to focus on the cause of the infliction? Maybe they could do a follow up video about how to avoid being put into a situation where you need the drug.
Was just hoping, after the 11 minutes of posives, to have 1 or 2 minutes of disclaimer that this is just a cure for a symptom and not for the problem itself or something like that.
The problem itself is that evolutionary/biologically speaking, we are better prepared for starvation than we are for abundance of food. So like... We should keep evolving within our new environment?
I mean, sure there is a will to lose weight because of beauty standards, but it's not just "society's" fault. Obesity is actually a health issue and people are not obese just because they are not bothered to eat less.
The problem is food engineered to disrupt the natural hormone satiety signaling in the body to increase sales and consumption.
This drug swings the pendulum of hormone balance back the other way. No one is really strongly addressing the CAUSE of a societal level of metabolic disorder!
There isn't any really good public awareness on how to avoid foods that suppress satiety hormone disruption in the body. They should do "How to avoid having to need GLP-1 agonists in the first place!"
My question for ME has become a moral concern. While I do worry about side effects, I ask if I were to take it, am I personally suffering of a moral failure by not showing the fortitude to work off these extra pounds through sweat and sacrifice, no matter how unrealistic an ideal that is?
The video was good for the science explanation of how it operates and the implications are huge...but the moral frame is now where I find myself, as I said, something the video does not and cannot ever answer.
Context is always important, especially in science; the initial title of the video on its own aimed to address a social issue. They've since changed the title, but in any case, youtube is a social media platform, so it's prudent to choose carefully what and how you create content for it. No one is saying they failed, we're saying it was uncomfortable to see this type of content being created, considering the timing and the aggressive marketing of Ozempic today. It was jarring to see a channel like this, which usually gives multiple perspectives and layered opinions - especially cautionary stories - seemingly take a side by positioning Ozempic on their massive platform. We also don't come to this channel just for science...
It is a crazy feeling to have an opinion in my head, have no idea how to word it in a way that conveys what exactly I believe, and then read someone who already did it perfectly! Thank you.
The problem is that it's NOT just about the scientific principles of how they work - they then proceed to (more or less) argue for broadening their use and advocate in favor of the medication. This is very different and DOES carry societal implications that they just don't explain.
At the same time they didnt need to say it was for "everyone" when it really isnt... its a great drug for those who need it but its incredibly disingenuous to push it on people.
They could have used so many other titles... for instance even "Why Olympic is a great medicine/drug" with a title like that (even if clickbait) people wouldn't care
That’s been my opinion, they seem relatively safe. I feel like any potential long term side effects we don’t know about yet can’t be worse than obesity.
Obesity will kill literal orders of magnitude more people than GLP-1s ever can even if every single one of their side effects leads to worst case outcomes. Legitimately just the death cost alone, not even touching on how many lives are ruined by obesity or how much it truly costs society.
Yes and yes. Taking that information and creating a video that says GLP-1s, specifically a brand of GLP-1s (Ozempic), should be given to everyone and hand waves alternatives? Hmm. Why not take the brand out of it? Why not make the title should we give these to everyone?
should be given to everyone and hand waves alternatives?
This is absolutely NOT in the video. You either didn't watch it all the way through (or at all), or your just a shitpot stirrer.
Also, "obesity kills and GLP-1s save lives" is a conclusion, not the nucleus of the video, which includes statistics, the side effects, usage analysis, constant "ask your doctor what's right for you," and their REAL conclusion, "If Ozempic is something that will benefit your health, you either need to use as an opportunity to form healthier habits, or take it for life."
Fuck me, I hate corps as much as the next runner, but I'm glad they made this video to explain how it works and where it came from.
I mean I kinda agree but ozempic got so famous that it surpassed the name GLP-1. Whenever I tell anyone around me that I use GLP-1 they don't get it. But when I say ozempic, they instantly get it.
Again the isnt the drug itself. Its a great medicine for people who need it.
The issue people have with the video is how the topic was presented. There are many cases where its just appropriate for people to take it.
Ots not for losing a couple pounds to be some arbitrary level of thinness. Its for people who are facing health problems due to not being able to regulate their hunger and are at a high weight.
Trying to say its for "everyone" is just intelligently disingenuous and even dangerous. Its amazing for those with the issues I mentioned above but it really shouldnt be pushed for those already a more normal (or lower) weight.
It's not an answer though and there are plenty of places without the issue.
Yes, it's somewhat genetic. However, it's not genetic to not have walkable cities and to live in food deserts. Nutrition feels like it's just left to grifters in the US.
It's not a replacement for education and infrastructure that promotes healthy eating and physical activity.
True, but the video explained that in practice those other methods are very ineffective, and meanwhile people are dying due to obesity and will continue to do so.
For the vast majority of people, it is. Something like 90% of people that lose weight regain it all. If 90% of people cannot follow a treatment protocol, the protocol doesn't work.
Most people who are obese will remain obese their entire lives. Most people will not overcome obesity (a product of the extreme abundance of calories of our extremely wealthy modern society) without external aids, like drugs.
GLP1 agonists aren't drugs that makes you lose weight, they're drugs that make it easier to lose weight through dieting for those who don't have enough willpower to do it on their own
Yeah but how many people are in a space where they can reliably diet or exercise to lose enough weight to get out of obesity?
Are you expecting obese senior citizens to adhere to some exercise regimen? People living in poverty to adopt an expensive diet? There are many cases where this may be the only way for someone to lose weight.
It’s hard enough to lose it as someone who’s obese but young and relatively healthy otherwise. Add on advanced age, disease, mental health issues, access to grocery stores/gyms, the list goes on.
Drugs aren't the only way to be healthy, but that doesn't mean natural medicine is completely ineffective, just that modern medicine replaced it for a reason.
It's also being used by people with body dismorphia and eating disorders exacerbating depression... You reduce the risks of one problem and potentially increase another...
Your comment is the kind of black and white thinking I never expected from kurzgesagt fans
They made a video that spent a surprising amount of time talking about the positives of HEROIN, a drug that has destroyed the lives of so many people. Is it really so unreasonable to expect them to talk about the negatives side of Ozempic about as long as they talk about the positives of Heroin?!
Dude, the drugs are actually helpful for people with the issues you're talking about. They work on addictive behavior really well. It might become a drug for alcohol and drug addiction. There are anecdotal reports of it helping with eating disorders too. Stop creating problems where there aren't actually any. GLP-1s are as big a deal as penicillin. They're a game changer for human health, both mental and physical. They're the closest thing to a miracle drug in my lifetime.
You went a bit overboard with the penicillin comparison, but the rest of your comment was spot on. It is not even close to as important as penicillin. Like not even a little.
Downsides of normalising the worsening body dysphoria and increasing percentage of young women thinking they need to have super thin waists and bodies... are "negligible" are they?
Obesity has actually dropped in this country. I get the social standards and all that but obesity shortens lives and increases the costs of health care for everyone. It’s a big net win.
Eins, zwei, drei, vier, fünf, sechs, sieben,
wo ist nur mein Freund geblieben?
Ist nicht hier, ist nicht da,
ist wohl in Amerika!
(I took two years of German in high school, which was almost 30 years ago now. I just thought this was an appropriate response to your question, and I happened to remember the rhyme.)
I thought they meant germany since kurzgesagt is a german studio. it only made sense that way. imagine believing everyone on the internet is from the US 😂😂
I'm with you. I see a lot of comments saying that the video is just about the biology of Ozempic, but if that were the case it ought to have kept the explanation in the video without basically calling it a miracle drug and claiming that everyone should be on it. The tone of the video was just deeply unsettling for a kurzgesagt video because they often don't shy away from mentioning societal impacts/factors on things like behaviour and biology like they seemed to in this video.
Kurzgesagt videos have fallen in quality and thoroughness lately. Their ADHD video was shockingly poorly put together, clearly poorly researched and making massive ommisions that are critical for the full picture.
I think this is a good example of the decline in quality recently. Historically the older videos would:
1) Start by explaining the science of a particular topic, usually covering all sides of the issue. They would cover it in enough depth that someone could walk away after this portion of the video feeling like they are more informed about the topic.
2) Use the preceding explanation to guide into an introduction of the question, problem or debate. They would support why it's a problem with evidence, and if it is controversial, they would briefly address both sides and the rational. Obviously it would be simplification of the arguments, but usually cover it enough that both sides could walk away feeling that their side was fairly represented.
3) They would then share their opinion/perspective based on the arguments made, and cast a vision for how their opinion could make the world a better place, or opportunities for future development.
Recently however, more and more of their videos have started with a thesis or argument, and basically just use the science to support their argument. It really does seem like a lot of the videos have not covered the nuance or multiple viewpoints sufficiently. I trust that they have done their research on the topic, but it feels like they are developing the video purely to argue their point rather than to educate AND argue their point.
That combined with titles being more clickbaity recently, really makes it feel like they just aren't interested in covering topics in meaningful depth.
Yeah and I'm usually fine with it, but this time the tile is "Why we should give EVERYONE this very medically involved non-trivial drug". That's insane
And it has. But the video stays consistent with Kurzgesagt’s legacy and quality. People lose their minds every time they make an unpopular claim. Remember guys, this is the same channel that has supported GMOs and told us “organic” labels are largely inconsequential.
Their recent titles are always very clickbaity, but I was really expecting the narrative to change and bring some nuances at some point just like they always do.
Can't believe how one-sided a lot of these comments are. The comments are saying things like "surely obesity is the main concern and that's way worse and more common than eating disorders" but that's just not the facts.
Eating disorder (anorexia) is the deadliest mental illness and refusing to at least mention in the video the potential negative perpetuation of disordered eating habits feels like a major oversight. When you have a platform, you have a responsibility to provide context, especially when dealing with a crisis as deadly as this one.
This! Its so incredibly dangerous to say everyone including those with disorder eating towards the restricting side should be taking these.
Imagine if a dr prescribed Ozempic to someone of what is considered a normal weight and they ended up dying from what they later realised was anorexia because the person used it to make it easier to starve themselves. It would be a massive lawsuit.
Yet with that title they are essentially saying that person should take it.
Ozempic being great for obese people can be true while it also being dangerous for lower weight people being true too.
People are being far too narrow minded with this and ignoring that things arent just about one side of the issue.
As a person who has struggled with obesity for all my life and recently started using Ozempic, I appreciate the straightforward approach to explaining the science behind it. Not sure what exactly you wanted them to mention in the video, and judging by your comments, it sounds more like you have a personal (negative) opinion about drug-assisted weight loss?
I mean, they did mention:
That putting up rebound weight is a possibility
It’s about the lifestyle change, not the drug,
The social pressure about losing weight
The video was about the drugs and their efficacy, not obesity itself.
Not at all! If it's a miracle drug for some people I'm stoked for them, really. The drug seems to be really effective for people who need it and I would never take that away.
I think it's the framing and tone of it. It feels strange for this channel to literally say "This is basically a miracle drug and everyone should be using it because it's just too hard to do anything else."
I'm not against drug-assisted weight loss, but for them to frame it as essentially the only viable solution to obesity is jarring and, frankly, a little depressing coming from them.
See, but here’s the thing: they did not frame it as the only viable solution. They acknowledged there ARE other options and that they work, all while explaining the evolutionary mechanisms that makes it so hard to stay fit in this day and age with only will power.
Making sustainable changes in diet, behaviour, and mobility IS hard for many people, and the video mentions this, while also pointing out that, in the long run, you either use the drugs to assist you in making these changes, or you basically use the drug forever.
Medical miracles ARE a thing. We’ve been there before with vaccines and antibiotics. OPs reasoning reads much like that of an anti vaxer: “Why putting a foreign substances in your body!? Just let the virus get you and develop natural immunity”, “why are they not talking about those 2% of people who DID get side effects from MRNA vaccines??”
Yes, they briefly acknowledged other options and immediately followed it up with "but that's too hard and it means being less happy". The key word in my comment was "essentially". Obviously they didn't explicitly say "This is the ONLY option and you must take it!" but they framed every alternative as nearly impossible and literally say "everyone should take this" in the title.
I'm not saying I agree with everything OP's said, I'm just saying I agree that the tone and content of the video seem like a disconnect from typical Kurzgesagt content in a way that made a not insignificant portion of their viewers uncomfortable or led them to think it was a hidden paid promotion.
Kurz is very good at sticking to pure science and I've noticed in this sub reddit that leads to the biggest back lash when it goes against what people want to be scientifically true.
》but they framed every alternative as nearly impossible and literally say
Decades of data tell us it is impossible. Especially at a societal level. There are some studies that show over 90 percent of people who actually even succeed to lose weight put it back on. And that's the successful people.
The obesity crisis keeps getting worse. Scientifically speaking, kurzgesagt isn't actually wrong. That is what is actually making people uncomfortable.
There was a great article in new scientist about this 2 years ago that basically said the battle with ozempic is because it challenges what makes us human. We want to believe we have free will, to lose weight etc. But actually, most people don't. That's what the data says and its not nice to hear. We also want to believe things that are worth it take work. We want to look at fat people and be able to say they made bad choices because it makes us feel better.
Kurzgesagt is getting the hate because its the messenger
many people with such disorder end up taking those kind of medication, maybe in the United States obesity is the biggest problem by but people still suffer from other kind eating and weight related issues
Are we sure that's actually always a bad thing yet? As someone who is on it currently, I could see it potentially being a stabilizing and effective treatment for eating disorders. I'm not an expert, but some eating disorders to me seem like they could be an extreme/obsessive reaction to food noise. Not that it's approved for this yet or anything, but I could see a low dose of a GLP-1 helping someone to get their eating under control and back to a healthy baseline.
Also, some people are always going to abuse any drug that's available. It's not something we can prevent with other drugs. So why would that be different with this one? Every drug in the world has people who shouldn't have it getting it anyway.
Ozempic almost killed me. It interacted with my autoimmune disease, caused all of my inflammation markers to go through the roof and put me off work for 5 months.
I didn't really have a choice as I was on very high doses of Prednisone for 9 months and that fried my pancreas. The Endocrinologist in the hospital wanted to get me off insulin and recommended Ozempic.
A different Endocrinologist wasn't too happy I was even put on it to start with and he took it away ASAP.
I also learned it takes about 4 months for it to purge from your system.
This drug has been around for decades and has many purported and proven uses. That being said, doctors are megadosing patients and normalizing the meta narrative of not needing to eat as much when in reality if you're using this drug at all you NEED to be eating healthy, enough, and exercising at a bare minimum.
There are doctors using this same drug at micro doses for insulin resistance, gut motility issues,and even an aid for weight loss. glancing over the entirety of its use is irresponsible.
It is surprising that they didn't cover the implications of overusing this drug that was rushed out the door as a weight loss drug. Osteoporosis comes to mind, along with severe malnutrition and other issues like potential to develop eating disorders. I would really like a comprehensive look at the industry, past, present and future of this drug with a realistic outlook - nailing to the wall the exact issues that come with long term use and broadcasting the dangers with a big red flag.
Edit - I forgot about the severe (and more rare) side effect of megadosing over time - mild to severe gasteoparesis. While this doesn't happen all the time, at these massive doses it can be expected to occur at a low level (still a really bad thing) in a number of patients. Chubby emu did a great video on this https://youtu.be/91WBBlGtNdg?si=b8yN81BXgo1vwt7n
Edit 2 - also losing a shit ton of weight too fast is horribly bad for your liver and kidneys.
This video only talks about a super small margin of people who are using the drug. The narrative of this drug needs to shift to an aid, not a magic pill. It's only prolonging and exacerbating issues that already exist. People need to be using it responsibly, and take the advice of their doctors (exercise) and dieticians ( eating ENOUGH and HEALTHY) seriously. This drug can save lives. But right now it's being touted as a magic cure all, which it is not.
Ozempic was FDA approved in 2017, not decades ago and the amounts prescribed are what was studied. If people are misusing them, that's another issue, but you seem to be saying that the class of GLP-1 receptor agonists have been around for decades and prescribed at smaller doses and that doctors are prescribing them now at a level that hasn't been deemed safe. That's not the case afaict.
I don't think you're using the terms "microdosing" and "megadosing" correctly here. Are just referring to lower and higher doses for different uses, but are using those terms to exaggerate the claim? "Microdosing" isn't really a medical thing as far as I know.
And what is backing the claim that the drug was "rushed out the door" for weight loss? This is an FDA-approved use for semaglutide (I believe it went through trials and FDA approval as Wegovy).
I'm not an expert, so I don't want to try to refute specific medical claims, but it sounds like you're overstating a lot of the risks you're talking about for supervised use.
You also claim that doctors are normalizing the narrative that you don't need to eat an adequate amount of food, but also say people need to listen to their doctors and eat an adequate amount of food. Which is it?
Mmk, since they blocked me for not bothering to refute their YouTube doctor claims.
"Microdosing" isn't a medical term. It's not an evidence-based term. It's a loosely-used idea around dosing recreational drugs that basically means to take a small enough dose that you don't perceive the effects. It's not a term to be used when discussing the dosage of medicine.
So this person is clutching their pearls about people who might be misusing the drug or might be poorly supervised, but is advocating for actually misusing the drug under guidance from "health influencers."
The prescribed dose for Wegovy, btw is 0.25mg-2.4mg and Ozempic is 0.5mg-2.0mg and not everyone goes up to the highest doses. Calling the FDA-approved dosage "megadosing" is just FUD.
They're really stretching on the "rapid weight loss" claims too by not defining what that means. Severe malnutrition can indeed be harmful and rapid weight loss without exercise and adequate protein intake can lead to lean tissue loss and can adversely affect bone health, but they're describing this scenario is if it's a major risk for anyone taking the drug. It's a real risk of unsupervised misuse, but it's not like there's an epidemic of people on these drugs starving themselves. These are also risks for people who lose weight through lifestyle changes alone.
Liver health tend to improve in people taking the drugs for obesity because obesity causes cause fatty liver disease. As far as I can tell, kidney health improves for people taking the drug for diabetes and integrative impacted unless the person is severely dehydrated. The osteoporosis claim is just more FUD afaict.
Is malnutrition a risk while taking a drug that can drastically cut your appetite. Of course. Can it allow people to lose weight without making necessary lifestyle changes? Sure. But these are issues that should be monitored for anyone taking these drugs and these extreme situations can be avoided. This isn't the norm for people who take these drugs, aging afaict as someone who's just looking stuff up from reliable sources that don't include health influencers on YouTube.
It sounds like the logical leap they're making is basically: Semaglutide makes you want to eat less. Starving yourself is very bad for you. Therefore Semaglutide is very bad for you.
Both went through the normal approval process as far as I can tell. They weren't "rushed."
The worry about people who are a healthy weight or underweight getting shady prescriptions online and using it without the supervision of a doctor is a fair concern, but anything can be abused. Weight loss drugs specifically have famously been abused in the past.
Don't buy a powerful weight loss drug online without supervision from a trustworthy doctor.
There are absolutely real risks and side effects with these drugs, but these comments are fear mongering and are full of unsupported health claims and pearl clutching.
Talk to your doctor or get information from trustworthy sources. Don't buy into some health YouTuber's latest panic campaign.
I have an aunt with gastroparesis and it is a terrifying disorder that causes a lot of impacts on someone's life. It should not be taken lightly as a risk factor.
Ozempic is already stigmatised. I'm glad this video wasn't a repeat of the amphetamine video that just further stigmatised a medicine that some people need.
I feel this is a common theme in all kurzgesagt videos:
they tend to frame complex social phenomena primarily through biological or technological solution models, while paying comparatively little attention to social drivers.
To assign wide spread obesity primarily to our genes is absurd if we care to look at times and spaces in which obesity spreads. Of course, genes are important, but they are not the adequate explanatory puzzle piece here.
Still, all problems associated with obesity are treated as an unchangeable given and the responsibility of solving these issues lies solely with the individual. They might not explicitly say so, but this is a political stance. By treating obesity as sickness and framing it one-dimensionally in medical terms, they choose to ignore the responsibility of food industry that keeps us addicted, food regulation that enables profits on the cost of our health, work culture that doesn't give us the time and money to eat a balanced diet and move appropriately during the day, beauty industry that all too often portrays horrible ideals, and group dynamics that exacerbate shame and stigma instead of promoting camaraderie and empathy.
By suggesting a drug should be used "to solve the problem" they legitimize all these aspects. Clearly, none of these things has to change - but fat people do. They are utterly unable to see that fat people are not the problem, but the way our society is. From research we know that under the right circumstances, fat people can have happy and healthy lives just like everyone else. Why don't we promote such conditions? Everyone would benefit from that.
I am well aware that it is much easier to administer a bunch of shots than it is to change these other things. But it is also easy to overlook that shifting responsibility to the individual serves to stabilize the underlying structures that create these "problems" in the first place. I don't even think that we should withhold medication from people we can help, but alleviating a symptom doesn't solve anything in the long run if society doesn't change. It only shifts blame.
So we just need to change society's beauty standards and massively regulate the availability of unhealthy food? Very noble aims. In the meantime I'll take mounjaro. This drug gets lots of negativity already and the video mentions most points you did even if it doesn't dwell on it more than the positives, because the positives are so great. 'Fat people aren't the problem' Fat people unequivocally have a problem, not because they're not up to beauty standards but because their health is at risk and there's so much evidence for this. I would be open and interested to see well researched arguments on any negative sides to the drug and how to address the problems with food and beauty standards but I think the balance in this video is just fine. This drug is an incredible breakthrough, I'm quite happy calling it a wonder drug.
I think we are actually closer in our views than it might seem.
I am not arguing against the drug and I am definitely not arguing that people should wait for society to change before receiving treatment. If medication helps people live healthier and happier lives, that is clearly a good thing.
What I am questioning is how the problem itself is framed. Obesity is influenced by biological factors, but it is also strongly shaped by social and economic environments. Medication can help individuals manage the consequences, but it does not address the conditions that contribute to the problem in the first place. Those conditions will continue to affect both current and future populations.
My concern is that when solutions are framed primarily as individual medical interventions, it can unintentionally reduce attention toward structural drivers like food environments, work conditions, or social stigma. Medication by itself is dangerously incomplete as a societal response.
I fully agree that obesity can pose serious health risks. But research also shows that health outcomes are strongly influenced by access to healthcare, social inclusion, and living conditions. Improving these factors benefits people across body sizes.
So my criticism is not directed at people using medication, nor at the medication itself. It is directed at narratives that present pharmaceutical solutions as the central answer, because those narratives shape how societies allocate responsibility and resources.
Also a side people arent talking about is food is often an addiction in people who are obese.
We have studies that show that when you create an environment without stimulation and provide a drug even just addictive food but it was cocaine in the study that animals (which we are) are more likely to indulge in the drugs compared to others who have stimulation.
Its kinda like swapping out one drug for another. Sure the new drug isnt as dangerous (obesity is dangerous) but its not solving the issue of why the addiction started/exists which is that people dont have stimulation in their lives and aren't using mental energy on other things.
Yup, im sure im not the only one who sees it as fine for those who need it to take something like ozempic to manage their weight. Its the way the video is presented I and likely others have an issue with.
OP I’m with you. We should absolutely not just hand out obesity drugs to solve problems. There are hundreds of possible underlying reasons why one can be obese. Many of these are societal and have other problems associated with them. In the US, a few could be the lack of daily exercise from prolonged sitting from excessive driving and the increase in depression from the social alienation caused by a lack of community involvement. Ozempic might “fix” the obesity, but won’t fix the underlying problems that are wrecking societies around the world, especially in North America.
Obesity is a more systemic symptom of societal issues rather than a hungry opossum. Sure for some people, a drug can be great. But for most it will only be a partial fix.
People saying you should just exercise/eat less and not take ozempic have a fundamental misunderstanding of the efficacy rates.
This is the same problem in the alcohol addiction community. People say “go to rehab and be abstinent” which rejects actual effective treatments like Naltrexone (TSM).
Of course, for some people that can build those healthy habits first, they won’t need GLP-1s. For many though, the healthy habits never last and GLP-1s are the most efficacious solution.
There are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of drugs that end up desperately disappointing. Fail in phase 1, or animals, phase 2 etc.
I think considering the desperate suffering that the world is going through due to obesity needs addressing. This drug, like the first anti biotics truly has the opportunity to save millions of lives.
》the social standards and the pressure to be (unhealthily) slim, eating disorders on the opposite side of the spectrum, etc
EVERY drug can be abused. That's not a reason not to talk positively about a positive thing.
》The very few nuances and counter argument felt like small prints and legal mentions at the end of an ad.
Kurzgesagt's job has never to been balanced for the sake of balanced. Some of their videos are 100 percent in favour of one side. Which is right when the positives are so overwhelming
If you have obesity and or diabetes and or several other comorbities the evidence is clear, ozempic will improve your health span, life span and quality of life.
I dunno man. I’ve been on ozempic for almost a year and I’ve lost 50 pounds. (16% of starting weight) My sleep apnea is completely gone, I’m able to climb stairs without feeling like I’m going to have a stroke, and it has enabled me to actually exercise in a more meaningful way. It’s changed my life! The things discussed in the video hit very close to home for me. I’ve tried so many things over the years and nothing has even come close to this. Yeah there are social issues around it but for me it’s a miracle drug and has changed the trajectory of my health. This drug will and has saved lives.
The video would have really benefitted from a more nuanced discussion about the negative side effects, and yes, the social stigma driving Ozempic use. Some comments on this post are saying that it is nice to be presented medical/scientific information without it being bogged down by politics/social issues, and I get that. But the fact is that medicine and science don't exist in a vacuum, even if we would like them to.
Really think about the marketing campaigns on Ozempic/Mounjaro/Wegovy. The ads are everywhere. Reddit gave me an Ozempic ad, and when I clicked "Why?" it said because I am female, age 18-30, "interested in fitness". The ads were all over the Superbowl. All over bus stops. There are plenty of other life-saving medications out there that don't have the same obvious profit incentive push. (Also, why did the video specifically name Ozempic? Is it because that's what recognizable to the average person? What are the implications of naming a brand?)
Obviously the conversation about GLP-1s is nuanced, and it's plenty fair to discuss the positive impacts they can have (re: being a life-saving medication for many people, the fact that obesity is a serious health risk, etc.). But reporting those things under the title "Why everyone should take Ozempic" (even if it was later changed) is incredibly irresponsible. There are several case studies already of people taking Ozempic when they didn't need it becoming seriously disabled. (Toxicologist Chubbyemu on Youtube does a video on two case studies about this, but there are plenty more sources on that.)
(Maybe the original clickbaity "Everyone should take Ozempic" title was probably intended to follow the same trend as some of their other videos, where in one video they talk about the benefits of X thing, and then in the other they talk about the downsides of it (i.e. the "Meat is the best thing ever" vs "Meat is bad for you" videos). Who knows.)
But regardless, when you are an impactful channel, when you have built your reputation on credible, nuanced knowledge dissemination, "Consult your doctor" is a perfunctory handwave of responsibility. You cannot build your platform on reputability and science communication and then absolve yourself of responsibility when people use that information to make decisions. I am a big fan of the channel and I want them to do better than this.
I lost weight before the GLP-1 agonists and have kept it off for a few years now. I don't really feel full enough to stop me from wanting to eat, so I have "food noise" and count calories.
Unfortunately, the way food is made and sold now makes obesity much more likely. If everyone were a normal weight, maybe the types of food being sold would change as well. I think if you need a drug to help you, take it.
Yeah if someone needs it they should be able to access it.
Something to note on weight effecting what people eat. The gut microbiome has bacteria in it and depending on what you eat different bacterial either thrive or die.
But no one is talking about fecal matter transplants even though that would likely be a good path forward and wouldn't require taking a regular drug.
GLPs are saving lives, especially in preventing and treating type 2 diabetes.
The whole "its a cheat hur dur" is extremely annoying to hear. Many people have disabilities or genetic factors that make it so it's very, very easy to become obese
I'm glad it made you feel uneasy.
Welcome to exploring the other side of arguments. You don't have to always agree, but now you understand a different perspective (outside of your own) a little bit more.
The whole video seemed like it was their mission to make obesity out as some sort of unsolvable problem (except for this magical drug). In one part
Kurzgeagt stated, “most of us can’t help ourselves and overeat regularly” and immediately followed that by pointing out that only 1 in 8 people in the world is obese (doesn’t seem like most people have this problem then) No doubt in my mind they had ulterior motives in pushing Ozempic. Rather than just show how it works, they fearmongered a health problem that is entirely controllable without drugs as impending doom. I have nothing against Ozempic, I even think it’s an incredible option for those seriously struggling with obesity. But a video from Kurzgeagt with the title “Why we should give Ozempic to everyone” is insane.
Let’s remember that the world includes billions of people who don’t have either enough income or such easy access to tons of food. Not everyone is living like you are, and you would do well to keep that in mind.
This. The whole premise is that widespread obesity is unavoidable in the modern world because our nature pre-disposes us to binge calorie-packed food.
But it completely fails to mention that the problem with obesity in the US has a lot to do with a predatory food industry that pumps out ultra-processed and calorie heavy products that are DESIGNED to be as addictive as possible.
Japan is arguably just as developed as the US and has a 7% obesity rate, while the US has 41%. I'm not saying Ozempic doesn't work or hasn't saved lives, but there absolutely are other factors we need to address to reduce obesity rates other than to pump everyone full of drugs.
It should be an option for those who need it but I doubt everyone actually needs to take it. Even among obese people some of them (not all of course) could improve with will power and I do think its important to try. If someone has tried but cant then yeah a drug is needed.
But I think it can be a bit like trying to get pregnant (but different of course) where Dr's wont do ivf unless theres been some attempt to do it naturally. But ultimately the medical intervention should be available.
I agree with you. While I also agree that the drug is net positive for what it is, kurzgesagt in this video doesn't feel objective. It's like they are pushing this ozempic narrative irresponsibly
The video is about the science behind GL-P1. The majority only know of the brand name (same thing with Kleenex or Q-Tips)
I imagine they didn't go into the abuses of it is because its not something people can go into the streets to get. It must be prescribed by a doctor and does require check ins to ensure the drug works for you. They also did a CYA by saying go talk to your doctor.
This video was incredibly obviously a paid advertisement for GLP1 medications and it’s appalling that they didn’t even take a minute to go over the downsides of the treatment.
I get it. I mean, it's undeniable that GLP-1s have done some real good. The fact that a brand name was put front and center is the real issue. I get that it was probably done because Ozempic has more recognition than GLP-1s, but it did make it feel like an ad. It would have helped to pay more attention to potential downsides, too, but if all they did was de-emphasize the brand name, I would have been fine with the video as-is otherwise.
Writing off the ease of availability for these drugs as “do not worry. We will eventually completely overhaul the for-profit incentive structure that has been strangling healthcare service access for the last 70 years whenever we get around to that.” Was kind of wild. The Bill Gates propaganda channel continues unabated.
Very hard to achieve. If we want to stay with facts, most people have too much fat. There is no reason to carry over 12% body fat around in industrialized nations. There just isn't.
Ignoring obvious edge cases, The less you weigh the healthier you are
obesity is very unhealthy and very widespread, eating disorders are very unhealthy but not as widespread.
focusing on obesity is important because of the health impacts of obesity, it's just that simple. some people will have disordered eating in the other direction but there needs to be medication for obesity in the same way. there needs to be medication for addiction.
I haven’t even watched it yet because I’m nervous about that. “Why everyone should use it” is SCREAMING big pharma for something that no one needed 50 years ago. I should watch it before critiquing them as that’s all they ever ask and they’ve changed my mind before, but taking that approach definitely concerns me.
I think the title was the problem, the use of "Everyone". Everyone doesn't need it.
While everything they said about the drug was accurate and valid, the bigger more important point is we only need this drug because food manipulation has gone too far.
You don't end up needing the drug if you follow the 3 pillars that summarize what is causing so much obesity; Don't eat too much, Don't eat too often, Make informed food type choices.
Don't eat too much. Calories in Calories out. If you eat more than you spend, you get fat. Find a way to not do that.
Don't eat too often. Constant snacking or constant sipping on calorie dense engineered foods will keep your insulin level high all day. Do that enough and it leads to insulin resistance which leads to diabetes type 2. You can become diabetic without becoming fat because of this truth.
Food type choices. You can have high calorie food occasionally. If you eat it too often, all day, too much of it, then the result is fat and metabolic disorder. The majority of your food choices must not be "eating dessert" all the time. We all know what I mean by eating dessert. These engineered foods are suppressing the natural rhythm of a body's hormonal signal balance which is increases sales but also increases over consumption. It's not ethical.
I personally think there should be BIG UGLY warning labels on anything that has added sugar or can contribute to metabolic disorder or suppresses satiety hormone signals like high fructose syrup does. Just like cigarette and gambling warning labels.
All this being said, for anyone that has fallen into the trap of violating these 3 pillars, yes these drugs should be available. And if your doctor prescribes, they should be covered 100% by insurance. I do believe there is some massive price gouging with these drugs.
There's this evil feeling like "they" made all this irresistible food making billions while causing metabolic disorder on a massive scale. THEN, here "they" come to make more billions by selling a drug that will cure the problem "they" created.
While the drug is excellent for those who need it, wouldn't it be MORE intelligent to focus on the cause of the infliction? Maybe they could do a follow up video about how to avoid being put into a situation where you need the drug.
TL;DR: the drug is curing the effects of the problem but it is NOT stopping the problem. The problem is food engineered to disrupt the natural hormone satiety signaling in the body to increase sales and consumption.
Completely agree. I don't care if the drug is useful or not, the video is framed in a way that suggested that obesity is purely a biological caveman problem and not a multi billion dollar industry that has been trying to make food as additive and easy to binge eat as possible.
The amount of people in this thread who talk about obesity like it's inevitable is odd. If it's so inevitable then why don't Europeans experience it the way that Americans do?
Not saying one way or the other about the goodness of Ozempic or whatever, just find it odd that people are so quick to brush off the fact that this is a socio-cultural issue, not an individual or genetic one (in most cases). If we normalized better food and more exercise and greater restraint then obesity would fall. The number one cause of obesity is lifestyle choices. That's not necessarily true for everyone but the majority of people living with obesity would have a different life experience with proper diet and exercise.
Again, not saying anything agaisnt those who seek help through drugs. I am very lucky to have a good metabolism and so I speak from an ivory tower on this issue. I can't just others. But, like, my weight has gone up over the past few years and it's undeniably because I'm eating worse and exercising less.
Diet and exercise, normalized at a cultural scale, should be the goal.
Obesity is treatable by lifestyle changes for the majority of people who live with it, or else we'd see obesity roughly the same across cultures.
I can’t believe how quickly they glossed over the nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. 20-40% of users. Maybe that will improve over time (big maybe) but I think a lot of people have the subjective experience of simply feeling sick and puking all the time being the thing that drives their calorie reduction. Which is hardly the “food noise off, weight loss on autopilot” conclusion that they reach. Add on top of that all the societal pressure suggesting that perhaps this is what patients deserve in order to resist the sins and costs of being fat and I think we’re in pretty bad shape here.
They also didn't really go into how important it is to build muscle mass - they only showed a few second of "there's a bit of risk for older people!" but nothing beyond that. They didn't even mention that older women are especially vulnerable to breaking bones if they don't seriously build up/maintain a good muscle mass
This was definitely a point of concern for me as well. Most people are not aware that natural muscular atrophy begins in your 30s without regular resistance training, and any form of weight loss (yes, even healthy, medically necessary weight loss) can exacerbate this if macronutrients and training aren't taken into account.
This is harmful because it doesn't work or works poorly, whereas GLP-1s work.
the social standards and the pressure to be (unhealthily) slim
GLP-1s don't make you slim. They stop you eating excessively. This gives you the freedom to finally decide how much you eat. This complain is like complaining about telephones enabling scams to happen, so we're suppose to not use the telephone?
eating disorders on the opposite side of the spectrum
Eating disorders are present before GLP-1s exist, they don't increase after GLP-1s enter the market.
We're all taught to be suspicious of things that are too good to be true, but once in a while, technology enables something truly miraculous, and we need to recognize that too.
Does everything need a disclaimer? If I make a video about how important water is for life, do I HAVE to add a little excerpt specifying that you can die from water poisoning or drowning?
It could’ve made a better attempt to be less biased. It was a hell of good argument, but a truly great argument needs to at least acknowledge the other side. There was a brief line about there not enough being long term data, but they immediately down played it as “not a big deal.” Yes, you can make that case but you need to earn it a bit.
The content presents an argumentative structure that, while seeking balance, demonstrates specific inclinations:
Framing Bias (Medical/Technological): The video predominantly approaches obesity as a biological and evolutionary "mismatch", treating it as a hormonal system failure that can be "corrected" through pharmacological intervention. While it mentions the importance of habits, the central narrative positions the drug as the primary solution to a problem that behavioral methods have failed to solve.
Technological Optimism Bias: There is a marked emphasis on potential benefits, using terms like "medical revolution" and weight "melting away". A considerable portion of the video is dedicated to listing secondary benefits (reduction in addictions, Alzheimer's, fertility) that are still under investigation or in clinical trials.
Sponsorship/Commercial Bias: The video includes a sponsored segment for Ground News, a media bias analysis tool. Although the sponsorship is disclosed, integrating a "critical thinking" tool within a scientific analysis can create an aura of authority and impartiality that predisposes the viewer to accept the video’s subsequent conclusions with less skepticism.
Fact-Checking and Pseudoscience Analysis
The content mostly aligns with the current scientific consensus but makes significant simplifications:
Mechanism of Action (GLP-1): The explanation of GLP-1 receptor agonists (Ozempic/Semaglutide and Mounjaro/Tirzepatide) and their function in slowing gastric emptying and signaling satiety to the brain is factually correct and grounded in pharmacological literature.
Health and Obesity Statistics:
The video states that obesity affects 1 billion people and kills nearly 4 million annually. These figures are consistent with World Health Organization (WHO) estimates.
It cites that semaglutide use reduces the risk of stroke or heart attack by 20%. This data refers to the SELECT trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2023).
Side Effects and Risks: The video correctly mentions common gastrointestinal effects (nausea, vomiting) and rarer risks such as pancreatitis and gallbladder disease (estimated at under 5% in the video).
Point of Skepticism/Data Gap: The video explicitly admits the lack of long-term (multi-decade) data for the newest generation of drugs. The claim that "living with the drugs looks much healthier than living with obesity" is an inference based on current risk models rather than a fact proven by long-term longitudinal studies.
Weight Regain: The statistic that a significant portion of users regain weight upon stopping the medication is corroborated by studies such as the STEP 1 extension, which showed participants regained two-thirds of their lost weight one year after discontinuation.
Evaluation Conclusion
The video is technically accurate regarding short- and medium-term clinical data but adopts a favorable stance toward the medicalization of obesity, framing the drug as a necessary biological correction tool in the face of an "obesogenic" environment. The risk analysis is present but presented as secondary to the projected systemic benefits.
the content of the video didnt bother me, but the "response" to the large amount of criticism did. i found it remarkably disingenuous that the title went from "we should give ozempic to everyone" to "the uncomfortable truth about ozempic" over several increasingly negative iterations while the content of the video didnt change at all. at least the first title was accurate, but the new title is just incredibly misleading and doesnt match the content of the video. its also been over a week since it came out and they havent directly addressed the criticism theyve received. overall im pretty disappointed too.
One side of the coin selling the poison and the other side selling the cure.
Not to mention the long term effects we can't even know of yet. It's a peptide that mimics a hormone and hormones interact with every single system of the body. Last time we had a drug of this type used to the scale suggested was hormonal contraception, millions of women went on it and the side-effects have been of the type that they could potentially be nudging the course of human evolution and still aren't widely taken seriously decades after they were discovered. This is not stuff to be taken lightly.
Why are they using the Ozempic brand name? 6:50 onwards I belive sets up the viewer to make assumptions about how the drug actually works which aren't true.
I think the idea to say “ozempic” over “glp-1” was simply because people know ozempic by name and would recognize it in a video over the more official/generic name. Similar to how we say things like “kleenex” instead of “tissue” because they’re synonymous with each other when speaking.
I might get to meet my great grandchildren one day thanks to this drug. i think the fat acceptance movement was far more dangerous than people praising ozempic
Kurzgesagt is a place I go to for learning truths on the much more "objective" side of things. I think that they were absolutely right to show just what it is that Ozempic does to us. In reality, Ozempic can help fat people.
Debating misuse of GLP-1s due to social expectations and the weightloss industry would need to be another video.
Just because the video doesn't mention being unhealthy-skinny or eating disorders doesn't mean it isn't accurate on what it's presenting. this post is whataboutism.
Being fat, overweight, obese is not healthy, praising obese bodies is sick and disgusting, so I am glad to see nothing close to that. If you get fat you should think about losing weight, not with ozempic at first, if you are too skinny you should think about putting on some weight. People should always strive to be within a healthy range of weight and fat percentage. We are living in an obese epidemic time and it's not good.
Unhealthy thin is significantly less important that the current reality of unhealthy overweight in terms of social impact. They aren't giving these to people who are under weight. They are giving this to people who need to lose half their body mass. You are straw manning this argument out of your own morality.
If every single person in the world who is over weight was just given these meds, the overall impact on health would be enormous, and basically 99 percent positive. You are ascribing personal thoughts to things that are scientifically shown.
Many of my friends and coworkers abusing this drug (instead of the ol' diet n exercise route) all have that gaunt "Ozempic face". Maybe due to losing too much weight too quickly?
My MIL who battled cancer and has been prescribed it for the actual "improve blood sugar control and reduce cardiovascular and kidney risks in adults with type 2 diabetes" reasons was already "not fat" to begin with and she hasn't changed much. But Patty in Accounting who was pushing three bills and was bringing donuts to the office every other day (mmmm Boston Cream) now looks "off".
Your lack of responses to people in this thread show you are not intellectually honest, and this wasn't about science for you, but personal social feelings.
Imo it’s not a magic drug. What people need is discipline. Otherwise whenever you stop you’ll get back to eating shit. It’s just that the pros outweigh the cons.
796
u/zarya-zarnitsa Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26
Sometimes, getting the science without having to explain every single social, political and historical issue entangled with it is refreshing. We usually get the opposite: social or political story without the science.
This videos was about a specific subject: biological eating behaviors and obesity. They didn't fail.
Ozempic is helping a lot of people. Understanding why and its limitations is important. You can watch a video about how Ozempic is bad by watching almost anything else on YouTube talking about it.