The Ozempic “Cure-all” Narrative has hit the mainstream
And with it comes the era of disastrous chronic disease management.
A few days ago Nature published an article with a headline that I have alluded to for quite some time.
In this case, the article entertains the question regarding why these diabetes turned weight-loss medications such as Ozempic appear to have effects on many different diseases:
The actual content of the article is not of concern- it seems to serve more of an amalgamation of the currently ongoing research into these GLP-1 receptor agonist medications.
Instead, the main concern I find is in the presentation of this research and the framing that these medications may serve as some sort of future “cure-all”, as emphasized by a comment made by one researcher:
“We’re in a phase where GLP-1-based drugs are being considered as potential cures for every condition under the Sun,” says Randy Seeley, an obesity specialist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, who has consulted for and received research funding from several firms that develop obesity drugs.
It’s a minor comment, and Seeley goes on to make a comment regarding hesitation with these medications for those who may be obese and concerns regarding side effects.
Nonetheless, this article is that it serves to bring up an idea that I have raised in prior articles, but doing so in a more mainstream/palatable way.
That is, it introduces the idea that these drugs may be “cure-alls” to the mainstream public. Not only does Nature have a wide reach, but Nature being one of the premier science publications in the world also lends some eyes and ears to the ideas it presents.
Thus, Nature entertaining the idea of these medications being a “cure-all” will likely lead other publications and readers to do the same, with a downstream effect of further placing these medications in a positive light.
Now, I have sprinkled my prior articles and comments from readers with my own perspective on why I find the idea of a “cure-all” extremely concerning. But given this recent article I find it fitting to flesh out my own perspective a bit more.
When I initially began covering the Ozempic craze over two years ago I started from a place of curiosity and examining why this strange drug was garnering so much attention.
Around that time this class of medications called GLP-1 receptor agonists were revolutionary as they appeared to be the first steppingstone towards having a viable weight-loss medication- something that has been researched for years and coincided with the ever-growing waistlines of the public and concerns over the obesity crisis striking much of the world.
Over time the narrative around these medications grew more and more concerning. What first started as reticence by many people as an easy get-out-of-obesity free card turned to positive public opinion and growing interest. No longer was this a medication for the wealthy elites and viewed as a near luxury item, but every day individuals began to take these medications even though they came with a giant price tag.
And eventually concerns arose regarding the long-term safety profile of these medications. As more people got their hands on these drugs several reports of stomach/intestinal paralysis made their way into the news.
This should have obviously led to renewed reticence, and yet interest in these medications continued to grow even as stories of these alarming side effects continued to be reported.
Simultaneously, various studies continued to come out touting widespread benefits of these medications. The list of research avenues utilizing these GLP-1 RAs is constantly growing, and as of now researchers are looking into these medications as being possible therapeutic agents for maladies such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, addiction, Alzheimer’s/dementia, Parkinson’s, and general inflammation.
Now, from a scientific perspective I find all this research fascinating. Many cells in our bodies appear to bear GLP-1 receptors, and therefore native GLP-1 appears to have systemic effects and isn’t just an incretin hormone related to food and weight.
And for all intents and purposes much of our knowledge on native GLP-1 is due to receptor agonist research, and so as much as I disparage these medications, they have helped increase our general knowledge regarding various biochemical processes. In fact, a good deal of our knowledge regarding cellular pathways is owed to drug research- we tend not to know what some enzyme, receptor, or pathway does until we try to gunk it up, and thus drugs have helped to elucidate areas of uncertainty. This is also how many agents go on to become prospective therapeutic agents as well, so there’s unfortunately no way to decouple drug development and our understanding of biochemistry.
That being said, I have been highly critical of the narrative around all of this research due to the fact that continuous research only serve to push the idea that these GLP-1 RAs should be prescribed for everyone. If they truly can treat any disease under the sun then there is no one that should not be injecting these medications.
More importantly, and something that seems to have been overlooked by many, is a personal concern that the narrative around a panacea may come with it coercion and forced mandating of these medications.
Imagine, for instance, that researchers find a clear link between the use of GLP-1 RAs and addiction management. We have clear anecdotal evidence that people who have used Ozempic and similar medications don’t feel the need to drink or smoke as often as they did prior to these medications, so it’s not far-fetched to believe that GLP-1 is related to addictive behaviors in some way.
Again, in a vacuum this research seems fascinating as it would suggest that food addiction may not be too separate from regular addiction, and that many of the neurological components involved in addiction of various sorts may be due to GLP-1 in some manner. It adds a lot of nuance to the already complex nature that is addiction, and if we find that these medications do in fact help manage addiction then that adds one tool to the already limited arsenal of addiction treatment available.
But what if prescription of these treatments are not up to the discretion of addicts and tending clinicians. What if these medications become mandated for self-admitted addicts or people who are diagnosed with addiction? What if people who are caught using illicit drugs must be mandated to take Ozempic as part of a plea bargain, and must be on these medications for the foreseeable future lest they be breaking their plea deal?
What if organizations such as Alcoholics Anonymous adopt a requirement that their members must adhere to GLP-1 RA use in order to come to meetings and show that they are indeed putting effort into beating their addiction?
In any other timeline this idea may appear preposterous, and I myself try to avoid conspiratorial thought processes. However, we have been shown clear indications that this sort of thing is possible through the pandemic and the mandating of the COVID vaccines where lack of informed consent was at the forefront of why many people did not want to take these vaccines.
We’ve been privy to clear manipulative tactics that resulted in people taking medical interventions that they would not have done willingly if not for coercive tactics or a barring from societal participation.
Thus, I don’t find it too unbelievable to see a world in which an alleged panacea may be forcefully prescribed to millions of individuals under the guise that this how diseases will be treated, managed, and prevented in the future.
And we even have evidence that such talks are already occurring. As mentioned in my previous article and discussed by Bret and Heather on their Darkhorse Podcast clinicians are already considering prescribing these medications for millions of people not just for treatment/management but for prevention of all sorts of diseases, as can be seen in the following excerpt from The Times (emphasis mine):
When patients were first prescribed a new drug called Ozempic in 2017 to help control type 2 diabetes, their dramatic weight loss was a surprise bonus (Eleanor Hayward writes). News of this unintended “miracle” slimming effect quickly spread, leading to the same key ingredient — semaglutide — being launched as a treatment for obesity under the brand name Wegovy.
Ever since then, more and more bonus treatment uses for the weekly injections have been emerging: ranging from alcoholism to Alzheimer’s. At this week’s European Congress on Obesity, delegates can be heard excitedly talking about a future in which millions of adults take the medications as a preventive measure. They think the drugs could soon be as ubiquitous as statins, taken by eight million adults in the UK to prevent heart attacks and strokes.
So even this doesn’t seem like a conspiracy, and in fact many people with power seem rather blunt in their enthusiasm for a world in which everyone is taking these medications.
A few days ago fitness celebrity Jillian Michaels testified in front of a Congress roundtable discussing health and nutrition in America, with her focus discussing the serious problem of chronic disease in America:
Jillian hits on many key points, and she highlights many of the problems that we are dealing with nationally.
Not only are the foods we eat heavily processed and non-nutritive, we are also less active, not sleeping well, and introducing many different chemicals into our bodies that are leading to obesity and chronic disease.
And rather than address chronic disease in a meaningful way by encouraging healthier eating and exercise, people instead are pushed towards pharmaceutical interventions as a means of not treating but managing the symptoms of disease. We are a country in which people are forced into a diseased state which can only be treated by alleviating the signs of the disease rather than removing the underlying causes.
As such, we continue the ever pervasive cycle of improperly managed health where millions of people suffer while pharmaceutical and food elites make off with billions upon billions of dollars.
Given this context the idea of a panacea is made all the more concerning. It further encourages the narrative that disease is not something that can be treated but something that may be prevent or managed predominately through pharmaceutical means.
In that sense, if these GLP-1 RAs are made out to be a panacea then we’re just further placing a bandage on an already highly destructive system. You don’t need to consider proper health and diet when you can just turn to a pill or an injection to “solve” all of your woes. Continue your bad habits but do so with a pharmaceutical buffer- mask the problem with superficial remedies.
It’s why I find this current situation rather troubling, and not too outside of the scope for what may come in the future.
It’s also why I don’t consider this era of medicine to be a fad. The popularity of these GLP-1 RAs only continues to grow, and if the narrative of a panacea gains widespread traction then we are going to be in a precarious public health situation.
We need more people to be aware and concerned of the possible future that these medications may bring in if they continue to be propped up as a miracle drug.
If you enjoyed this post and other works please consider supporting me through a paid Substack subscription or through my Ko-fi. Any bit helps, and it encourages independent creators and journalists such as myself to provide work outside of the mainstream narrative.
Upon its introduction, Prozac was lauded within the psychiatric community as a panacea drug, and we continue to live with the abominable fallout. Venoms, as found in the Ozempic class drugs, present unique problems within the body, accumulation over time being one, hence the heinous 'side effects.' How organ destruction can be viewed as neglible by medical practitioners escapes all reasoned thought.
My 78-yr-old mother told me recently that "all her friends" were on Ozempic for weight loss. I was horrified! Was this even trialed in elderly people? I know her friends--none of them are obese. They have the typical rounded grandma figure of 70- and 80-yr-old women. My own mother is slimmer than most, and I begged her not to start it. It was only this fall that I got my parents to avoid covid boosters--with some info I've learned here!