Do you consider prescription weight loss medications cheating?

Options
cm58916
cm58916 Posts: 1 Member
edited June 2023 in Health and Weight Loss

Do you consider prescription weight loss medications cheating? 137 votes

Yes
8%
harpieladyBarbaraHelen2013dollarbill181LemonMarmaladejtongen1Tbirding1VicDis2021christaballgranDebbsSeattlePrettyGrittmamalove4nonnijfattorusso 12 votes
No
68%
acaruso619rileysownercyn_lovepanda4153Falseprophethappydede1OnceAndFutureAthleteHolly1019ythannaheahreneebathsheba_cVailaraMelwillbehealthyDeniseMRussellMouse_Potatomajokiqpmomma1MaggieGirl135tiptoethruthetulipsMarymoe138 94 votes
Not for those with BMI over 30 but yes for those with BMI under 30
22%
Sherbogninerbuffjaygreen55Sb186ali_b83stacypeppdoodletoodlesjoans1976cm58916steveverbruggencwgrant67DreaDarling87Bloolime4587pordaloonapoonsmagicfoodfluffsiberiantarragonGaynorreed2512philandtoriSRosie4195dogmom1 31 votes
«13

Replies

  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    No, but to be a candidate you have to have a BMI over 30 or a BMI over 27 with a serious medical condition linked to obesity. Some of them have some pretty gnarly side effects, so for me to consider a prescription I would have to have some pretty serious medical stuff going to outweigh the potential risks and side effects of the medication.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,158 Member
    Options
    No
    Yeah, it's not a competition. I'm not particularly interested because I don't think my circumstances make it worth it, and I suspect that's the case for most people, but I don't make the decisions for them and I don't want to. If I was directly solicited about a person I knew, I might explain that I think the cons outweigh the pros in most circumstances, but "but losing weight with the aid of drugs is unfair" wouldn't be on that list.
  • siberiantarragon
    siberiantarragon Posts: 265 Member
    Options
    Not for those with BMI over 30 but yes for those with BMI under 30
    I wouldn't say "cheating" in any case but I don't think they should be prescribed unless the person is obese or has health conditions associated with weight. These stories of celebrities using them to lose weight before an event piss me off because you know there are people out there who actually need these drugs and can't afford them. And there have been drug shortages ever since COVID so maybe these rich people are even lowering the supply for everyone else. But "cheating" is an odd way to put it because it isn't a competition. Also, with side effects there is a cost-benefit analysis to be done of whether these drugs will increase your overall health or not.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,452 Member
    Options
    No
    Hopefully they wouldn't be prescribed unless there was a health risk, and the benefits outweigh (!) the potential risks of the medication, and of course it's not cheating to take action to improve your health.

    However, reading this thread, I hear that there might be times when they're prescribed inappropriately to people who don't have a high health risk from obesity. I still don't see it as "cheating". The average BMI of famous models and actresses looks like it's on the low side, and while they might not need to lose weight for health reasons, there migt be pressure to do so for their jobs. I imagine losing weight and keeping it off at a low BMI is difficult (without getting into disordered eating), so can see why people might want some pharmaceutical help, despite the risks.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,158 Member
    Options
    No
    Vailara wrote: »
    Hopefully they wouldn't be prescribed unless there was a health risk, and the benefits outweigh (!) the potential risks of the medication, and of course it's not cheating to take action to improve your health.

    However, reading this thread, I hear that there might be times when they're prescribed inappropriately to people who don't have a high health risk from obesity. I still don't see it as "cheating". The average BMI of famous models and actresses looks like it's on the low side, and while they might not need to lose weight for health reasons, there migt be pressure to do so for their jobs. I imagine losing weight and keeping it off at a low BMI is difficult (without getting into disordered eating), so can see why people might want some pharmaceutical help, despite the risks.

    This isn't directly related to your point, but it's what prompted this reply because my brain went on a tangent, so that's why I'm quoting it :smiley:

    I'm not comfortable calling it "cheating," but I think what unsettles me a little bit about this applies to "pharmaceutical help" in general - I think increasingly we use it as a crutch even when it's not needed. There's no denying the lifesaving help of genuine therapeutic uses of a lot of medications, and I'm not anti-medicine in the least, but there is, seemingly, an increasing tendency to look for "quick fixes" societally and it does bug me that behavior modification is often seen as impossible (or, in the case of Hollywood, the pressure to aspire to really wacky norms.) People engage in self-destructive behavior of all kinds but act like they have the right to not suffer from the effects of it, and the go-to solution isn't "figure out how to stop doing the thing," but "give me a pill to fix it instead that I'll be dependent on forever."

    I often feel like we're manufacturing our own problems. Changing habits is really hard, I think a lot of us know that from experience. My personal preference is to not play with my body chemistry unless something is actually wrong with how it's functioning. I prefer to think, and have experienced, that through hard work I can overcome challenges and be less self-destructive with how I eat and move, and I am overall much happier. I have a suspicion that it's possible for more people than we give them credit for, and I think it's probably better for them. But if you tell a person they can't, then they start to believe it. A lot of people think they can't get out of a lot of problems of their own making, and I think the effects of that are devastating to more than just those individuals.

    Is that "cheating?" I don't quite know.
  • siberiantarragon
    siberiantarragon Posts: 265 Member
    edited February 2023
    Options
    Not for those with BMI over 30 but yes for those with BMI under 30
    threewins wrote: »
    Saying that weight loss medicine is "cheating" is like saying that antidepressants are cheating because "you should be able to make yourself happy all by yourself".

    While "cheating" is not the right word to use, there's certainly something to be said for certain psychiatric (or any) drugs just being a band-aid or causing more problems than they solve via side effects.
    penguinmama87 wrote: »
    I'm not comfortable calling it "cheating," but I think what unsettles me a little bit about this applies to "pharmaceutical help" in general - I think increasingly we use it as a crutch even when it's not needed. There's no denying the lifesaving help of genuine therapeutic uses of a lot of medications, and I'm not anti-medicine in the least, but there is, seemingly, an increasing tendency to look for "quick fixes" societally and it does bug me that behavior modification is often seen as impossible (or, in the case of Hollywood, the pressure to aspire to really wacky norms.) People engage in self-destructive behavior of all kinds but act like they have the right to not suffer from the effects of it, and the go-to solution isn't "figure out how to stop doing the thing," but "give me a pill to fix it instead that I'll be dependent on forever."

    I often feel like we're manufacturing our own problems. Changing habits is really hard, I think a lot of us know that from experience. My personal preference is to not play with my body chemistry unless something is actually wrong with how it's functioning. I prefer to think, and have experienced, that through hard work I can overcome challenges and be less self-destructive with how I eat and move, and I am overall much happier. I have a suspicion that it's possible for more people than we give them credit for, and I think it's probably better for them. But if you tell a person they can't, then they start to believe it. A lot of people think they can't get out of a lot of problems of their own making, and I think the effects of that are devastating to more than just those individuals.

    I totally agree with this. Unfortunately I think Big Pharma has caused a lot of this attitude. For example the whole thing of "if you're on psychiatric medication you will need to be on it for life because you have a permanent chemical imbalance in your brain." While that is true in some cases, I don't think it's true in the majority of cases. Most depression or anxiety are caused by actual life issues that can be solved or at least coped with better. Pills aren't going to fix for example if you're living in an abusive environment or under an untenable amount of stress. But if you're healthy then the medical industry doesn't make any money off you. I remember reading that doctors were being recommended to prescribe antidepressants if someone was still grieving a loss of a loved one after a month. A month! So every normal emotion is being pathologized for profit. Same with all the people who are on blood pressure drugs, diabetes drugs, etc. when they really just need to eat healthier. Again, not saying this is the case for everyone on these drugs, but it certainly is for the majority of people who are on them. But people don't want to have to change their lifestyle and they're told that the pills will fix everything so they'd rather just pretend they're not destroying their health. Then of course you have to take more pills to fix the side effects of the first pills and before you know it you're on seven different medications.

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 33,960 Member
    Options
    I'm in the same camp as @siberiantarragon and @penguinmama87

    At one point I was on I don't know how many prescribed medications. It started with one, morphed into I think about 12 different ones I took every day.

    So
    Many
    Side effects

    After I lost weight and stopped drinking alcohol and got out of a very stressful life situation, I stopped taking them all except thyroid (levothyroxine.)

    I don't need them. I haven't taken any other prescribed daily meds for 20 years almost.

    If I go to the (medical) doctor and complain about - anything - she's going to recommend a pill. I mean, that's their job. Prescribe medicine. They don't care if there are interactions, some of them serious. Neither do the pharmacists. People who I would think would warn me about drug/drug interactions just don't, and I think that's malpractice.

    I had so many bad side effects from prescribed meds. Never again if I can in any way avoid that.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,158 Member
    Options
    No
    siberiantarragon wrote: »
    threewins wrote: »
    Saying that weight loss medicine is "cheating" is like saying that antidepressants are cheating because "you should be able to make yourself happy all by yourself".

    While "cheating" is not the right word to use, there's certainly something to be said for certain psychiatric (or any) drugs just being a band-aid or causing more problems than they solve via side effects.
    penguinmama87 wrote: »
    I'm not comfortable calling it "cheating," but I think what unsettles me a little bit about this applies to "pharmaceutical help" in general - I think increasingly we use it as a crutch even when it's not needed. There's no denying the lifesaving help of genuine therapeutic uses of a lot of medications, and I'm not anti-medicine in the least, but there is, seemingly, an increasing tendency to look for "quick fixes" societally and it does bug me that behavior modification is often seen as impossible (or, in the case of Hollywood, the pressure to aspire to really wacky norms.) People engage in self-destructive behavior of all kinds but act like they have the right to not suffer from the effects of it, and the go-to solution isn't "figure out how to stop doing the thing," but "give me a pill to fix it instead that I'll be dependent on forever."

    I often feel like we're manufacturing our own problems. Changing habits is really hard, I think a lot of us know that from experience. My personal preference is to not play with my body chemistry unless something is actually wrong with how it's functioning. I prefer to think, and have experienced, that through hard work I can overcome challenges and be less self-destructive with how I eat and move, and I am overall much happier. I have a suspicion that it's possible for more people than we give them credit for, and I think it's probably better for them. But if you tell a person they can't, then they start to believe it. A lot of people think they can't get out of a lot of problems of their own making, and I think the effects of that are devastating to more than just those individuals.

    I totally agree with this. Unfortunately I think Big Pharma has caused a lot of this attitude. For example the whole thing of "if you're on psychiatric medication you will need to be on it for life because you have a permanent chemical imbalance in your brain." While that is true in some cases, I don't think it's true in the majority of cases. Most depression or anxiety are caused by actual life issues that can be solved or at least coped with better. Pills aren't going to fix for example if you're living in an abusive environment or under an untenable amount of stress. But if you're healthy then the medical industry doesn't make any money off you. I remember reading that doctors were being recommended to prescribe antidepressants if someone was still grieving a loss of a loved one after a month. A month! So every normal emotion is being pathologized for profit. Same with all the people who are on blood pressure drugs, diabetes drugs, etc. when they really just need to eat healthier. Again, not saying this is the case for everyone on these drugs, but it certainly is for the majority of people who are on them. But people don't want to have to change their lifestyle and they're told that the pills will fix everything so they'd rather just pretend they're not destroying their health. Then of course you have to take more pills to fix the side effects of the first pills and before you know it you're on seven different medications.

    I think one of the issues here is that there is a lot of external pressure on people to maintain lifestyles that in the long run are not good for them. I can't speak to other countries, but at least in the US there is a ton of pressure to be married to your job, there's tons of social isolation that technology can't fix (or makes worse), and traditional support structures have just been eviscerated. You can opt out, but it takes a lot to be able to do that, and if you're already not optimally functioning, it's even harder.

    For my demographic it's basically become a meme that we're all on anxiety meds. And to be honest, except for my little subgroup of friends who have chosen to opt out of a lot of what's considered normal living these days, yeah, uh, the meme isn't a lie.

    My experience losing weight and reading many of the frequent posters on MFP suggests that weight loss involves a lot of changes in a lot of areas of your life. For most of us, we can't just keep doing the same things we were doing, but thinner. It involves some very conscious decision making and prioritization that isn't going to be necessarily rewarded by any of those external agents. That's a hard thing to take on. (That said, I still don't think that makes the "easy way" the right decision, but I do think it highlights the need for real, meaningful support.)
  • siberiantarragon
    siberiantarragon Posts: 265 Member
    edited February 2023
    Options
    Not for those with BMI over 30 but yes for those with BMI under 30
    penguinmama87 wrote: »
    I think one of the issues here is that there is a lot of external pressure on people to maintain lifestyles that in the long run are not good for them. I can't speak to other countries, but at least in the US there is a ton of pressure to be married to your job, there's tons of social isolation that technology can't fix (or makes worse), and traditional support structures have just been eviscerated. You can opt out, but it takes a lot to be able to do that, and if you're already not optimally functioning, it's even harder.

    I guess, but my counterpoint to that is:

    a) We created this lifestyle in the first place. For example the average American house is 2600 square feet, that requires a lot of money to buy and for upkeep. The houses didn't need to be that big, but that is what people wanted. We don't need a lot of stuff we buy yet we choose to waste our money on it, requiring longer hours to pay for it. Same with fast food culture and junk food culture, if we didn't keep buying it they wouldn't keep producing it. People act like you're weird and accuse you of having an ED if you want to eat healthy. We chose to make two working parents the norm when in the past one working parent was the norm, and we also chose to shame stay at home spouses and call them freeloaders. This also led to salaries being lowered which forced many families to have two working parents even if they didn't want to. We also chose to erode traditional support structures like religion or community groups. I think we need to place blame where the blame actually lies.

    b) While things aren't ideal it's certainly better than most of history. 100 years ago people were working 6 days a week, 10 hours a day, and they were backbreaking dangerous jobs for the most part.
    For my demographic it's basically become a meme that we're all on anxiety meds.

    I think that says more about how that demographic (I'm assuming you're talking about millennials or Gen Z -- I'm a millennial) doesn't have sufficient coping skills for the normal vicissitudes of life, and how doctors are all too willing to prescribe medication for normal mood fluctuations or normal stress.
    My experience losing weight and reading many of the frequent posters on MFP suggests that weight loss involves a lot of changes in a lot of areas of your life. For most of us, we can't just keep doing the same things we were doing, but thinner. It involves some very conscious decision making and prioritization that isn't going to be necessarily rewarded by any of those external agents. That's a hard thing to take on. (That said, I still don't think that makes the "easy way" the right decision, but I do think it highlights the need for real, meaningful support.)

    Well my question is why isn't there enough public support for healthy living? When a certain public figure tried to implement a healthy eating program in schools there was widespread mockery and kids didn't eat the food because they had already been trained by their parents to only want to eat junk food. The problems go beyond just work stress. I always laugh when people say how the West has a "diet culture" because it's the complete opposite -- we have an obesity culture.

  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,158 Member
    Options
    No
    siberiantarragon wrote: »
    penguinmama87 wrote: »
    I think one of the issues here is that there is a lot of external pressure on people to maintain lifestyles that in the long run are not good for them. I can't speak to other countries, but at least in the US there is a ton of pressure to be married to your job, there's tons of social isolation that technology can't fix (or makes worse), and traditional support structures have just been eviscerated. You can opt out, but it takes a lot to be able to do that, and if you're already not optimally functioning, it's even harder.

    I guess, but my counterpoint to that is:

    a) We created this lifestyle in the first place. For example the average American house is 2600 square feet, that requires a lot of money to buy and for upkeep. The houses didn't need to be that big, but that is what people wanted. We don't need a lot of stuff we buy yet we choose to waste our money on it, requiring longer hours to pay for it. Same with fast food culture and junk food culture, if we didn't keep buying it they wouldn't keep producing it. People act like you're weird and accuse you of having an ED if you want to eat healthy. We chose to make two working parents the norm when in the past one working parent was the norm, and we also chose to shame stay at home spouses and call them freeloaders. This also led to salaries being lowered which forced many families to have two working parents even if they didn't want to. We also chose to erode traditional support structures like religion or community groups. I think we need to place blame where the blame actually lies.

    b) While things aren't ideal it's certainly better than most of history. 100 years ago people were working 6 days a week, 10 hours a day, and they were backbreaking dangerous jobs for the most part.
    For my demographic it's basically become a meme that we're all on anxiety meds.

    I think that says more about how that demographic (I'm assuming you're talking about millennials or Gen Z -- I'm a millennial) doesn't have sufficient coping skills for the normal vicissitudes of life, and how doctors are all too willing to prescribe medication for normal mood fluctuations or normal stress.
    My experience losing weight and reading many of the frequent posters on MFP suggests that weight loss involves a lot of changes in a lot of areas of your life. For most of us, we can't just keep doing the same things we were doing, but thinner. It involves some very conscious decision making and prioritization that isn't going to be necessarily rewarded by any of those external agents. That's a hard thing to take on. (That said, I still don't think that makes the "easy way" the right decision, but I do think it highlights the need for real, meaningful support.)

    Well my question is why isn't there enough public support for healthy living? When a certain public figure tried to implement a healthy eating program in schools there was widespread mockery and kids didn't eat the food because they had already been trained by their parents to only want to eat junk food. The problems go beyond just work stress. I always laugh when people say how the West has a "diet culture" because it's the complete opposite -- we have an obesity culture.

    Yes, I don't think I disagree. It's just hard to be the holdout, is my only point. I say this as someone who was raised in very mainstream culture and lives very deliberately outside it now, and basically had to find all new people because everyone else said, "see ya" as soon as I started questioning it. The specific demographic I had in mind was "college educated white women in their 30s," so yeah, I'm a millennial too. It is kind of funny, though, because many of the people I used to be close to seem absolutely miserable, but I'm the one to pity because I stay at home with all these kids. :lol: (Don't get me started on the implication that a paid job is the only way one can ever exercise her brain!)

    I do think reasonable people can disagree about initiatives like school lunches. I'll freely admit I am not in favor of a lot of top-down style initiatives even when well intended. There are some cases where those sorts of interventions are appropriate but as you say the influence of family etc. holds way more sway. I don't think that's a bad thing in and of itself, but trying to override that may cause more problems than it fixes.

    I have a suspicion we're moving way beyond the scope of the thread, though. :sweat_smile:
  • siberiantarragon
    siberiantarragon Posts: 265 Member
    edited February 2023
    Options
    Not for those with BMI over 30 but yes for those with BMI under 30
    penguinmama87 wrote: »
    Yes, I don't think I disagree. It's just hard to be the holdout, is my only point. I say this as someone who was raised in very mainstream culture and lives very deliberately outside it now, and basically had to find all new people because everyone else said, "see ya" as soon as I started questioning it.

    Yeah I see what you mean. This can be dependent on where you live though. I live in an area where alternative lifestyles are more accepted, but also pretty much everyone is expected to be a workaholic. However I also have always marched to the beat of my own drummer and been at odds with most people in terms of my opinions on things. So I have always been friends with other "weirdos" who accept me for who I am and who aren't exactly "mainstream" either.
    The specific demographic I had in mind was "college educated white women in their 30s,"

    Yup, that's me too!
    It is kind of funny, though, because many of the people I used to be close to seem absolutely miserable, but I'm the one to pity because I stay at home with all these kids. :lol: (Don't get me started on the implication that a paid job is the only way one can ever exercise her brain!)

    In my experience all the households with kids I've seen where both parents worked full-time, including my household growing up, were full of stress, chaos, and misery. Even my childless friends who work full-time all either outsource most or all of the housework (cleaning person, laundry person, meal prep delivery service or eating out every meal, etc.) or they live in chaos. I think it's stupid how taking care of kids, cooking, and cleaning are now considered to be worthless and demeaning labor by society. What is worthless and demeaning about taking care of yourself and your family, compared to working for some corporation? I think we've gotten away from living a better life in favor of living a bigger life, so no wonder we are getting bigger and the boxes of pills we have to take every day are getting bigger.

    I don't have kids but I also am mostly a stay at home spouse (I work part-time sporadically but I have some health issues that limit how much I can work). There's definitely a lot of judgment from society, people saying you're doing nothing with your life, you're lazy, you sponge off of other people, etc. There's some Youtubers I follow who are stay at home spouses and people trash them online calling them lazy and so on. If I did work more it would mostly be for my own benefit since we don't need the money due to not having kids or owning a home, fancy car, etc. My partner is the one with the big career ambitions and workaholism but...he also binge eats due to stress, so I wish he would take it easier at work and focus more on his health, since he's always taking on extra responsibilities that he doesn't actually need to do.
    I do think reasonable people can disagree about initiatives like school lunches. I'll freely admit I am not in favor of a lot of top-down style initiatives even when well intended. There are some cases where those sorts of interventions are appropriate but as you say the influence of family etc. holds way more sway. I don't think that's a bad thing in and of itself, but trying to override that may cause more problems than it fixes.

    Admittedly I'm not an expert on the issue or anything but I just thought it was telling how strongly people reacted to their kids having to eat healthy for just one meal of the day (which they could choose to bring their own lunch for anyway).
    I have a suspicion we're moving way beyond the scope of the thread, though. :sweat_smile:

    Well, kind of, but I do think what we're discussing is kind of the heart of the issue of what the original question was trying to ask, which I think is: are weight loss medications just a cover-up for the real issues that cause obesity?
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 8,995 Member
    Options
    if I go to the (medical) doctor and complain about - anything - she's going to recommend a pill. I mean, that's their job. Prescribe medicine. They don't care if there are interactions, some of them serious. Neither do the pharmacists. People who I would think would warn me about drug/drug interactions just don't, and I think that's malpractice.

    Huge generalisation there

    that isnt my experience of working in health care at all.

    Doctors I have worked with certainly do care about side effects and certainly are encouraging patients to live healthy lifestyles..
    Their job is far more than just prescribing medication


    and certainly most people I know, and most of the patients where I work, are not on anxiety meds - can't speak for your circle of people but I do not think that is the norm at all for people doing what you called 'normal living'.

Categories