this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
284 points (98.0% liked)

Not The Onion

19438 readers
979 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 23 points 3 days ago (4 children)

On one hand, I'm happy these GLP-1s work. On the other, I'd rather the US figure out diet and exercise instead injecting themselves with Gilla Monster venom and rolling the dice on long-term complications.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Pharmaceuticals are life saving for people in various conditions whether thyroid issues, achieving a body that can exercise in the first place, or fast interdiction for diseases associated with excess body fat. But yeah i agree with your point if someone's problem is their own choice in diet and exercise.

When you go off GLP-1s you generally gain all that weight back. So when they're discussed in the context of saving airlines on fuel costs it's not that far a leap from cynicism about pharmaceutical companies being pretty excited about rising popularity in a take-forever-drug.

Capitalism is so gross...

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

No one knows the Long term complications of glp1 inhibitors.

[–] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Obesity has long term complications, too. And we know them to be bad.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Agreed, but as someone whose weight has fluctuated a lot in life, I know exactly what is causing it when I've gotten overweight. Typically, I'm not moving my body enough, and probably eating too much / not eating well. If I address it, the problem gets solved. It's really that simple. I get that not everyone is in my situation where they can do that, but it's the solution for probably 90% of obesity cases. Really all you have to do is eat less carbs/ fried food and eat more fiber and protein. Exercise in any way you can. Start slow with walking and light cardio and work your way into resistance training and more intense cardio. The issue with that solution is it's hard, and a lot of people just aren't motivated enough to put in the work to achieve that goal. I'm happy that these drugs exist, but I just wish that nutrition was something we focused more on in school, and people were more knowledgeable about their bodies.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The thing is just about every single diet drug to date has had much worse complications. Like destroying hearts, blood vessels, anal leakage. Losing weight the old school way is the best way of it's possible.

The side effects they're finding are that it unexpectedly prevents Alzheimer's symptoms and other neurodegenerative issues, influences the brain to want to drink less alcohol and smoke/vape/chew less nicotine, and helps with chronic pain.

The point, though, is that it makes metabolic changes by having people eat less. Pointing out problems with drugs that increase resting metabolic rate (so that they burn more calories without exercising) or decrease absorption of macronutrients in digestion (so that they take in fewer calories from the same food) doesn't really inform how we look at these behavior-altering and desire-altering drugs. They're losing weight by eating less, not by interrupting the relationship between eating and net caloric intake.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Issue is, gymbros are the worst gatekeepers. They either think they can turn everyone into a top atlete by demanding everyone to act like one, or want to "keep it a niche".

Yes, a lot of counterexamples exist. So are a lot of counterexamples to techbros, toxic gamers, etc., but when people talk about toxicity within these circles, they're not talking about the good ones, and even "gradual toxicity" also do exist sometimes.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (2 children)

You don't need a gym to lose weight. The only thing that works is calorie reduction. You won't find that in a gym.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's simple math, burn more than you eat. Americans take the elevator to the gym on the second floor.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Eh. Whatever gets people in the door and doing SOMETHING is fine. But you can't gym your way skinny.

Strength is made in the gym.

Abs are made in the kitchen.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

By gymbro, I meant the whole fitness culture.