Comment by mullingitover

Comment by mullingitover 3 months ago

2 replies

> If you have a smoking epidemic, better lung cancer treatment is not the right answer.

You’re correct, but Ozempic isn’t a lung cancer treatment, it’s a supremely successful smoking cessation aid. I don’t understand how you’re struggling with this metaphor as a Science STEM PhD in Science.

Obesity is a physics problem: you can gain weight on the healthiest food imaginable, and you can lose weight on a diet of marshmallows. Ozempic attacks the lack of control over the calorie input, the only thing that ultimately matters in this equation.

mlyle 3 months ago

> Ozempic attacks the lack of control over the calorie input, the only thing that ultimately matters in this equation.

But in fairness, there's a complex etiology behind the lack of control of the calorie input, and attacking causes a bit earlier in the chain could make even more sense, no?

I'm not saying Ozempic is bad-- it's quite a good thing. But to the extent that it lowers our desire to really figure out these causes and deal with them, that's unfortunate.

Beijinger 3 months ago

Look, I gave this as a metaphor. Better anti-lung cancer drugs (not Ozempic) are not the right answer to the smoking problem. Neither is Ozempic the right answer to the epidemic. I don't oppose Ozempic, neither would I better anti-lung cancer drugs, and both should be covered by insurance. But both "solutions" would not address the underlying problem? Is this so hard to understand? A 5th grader should understand this.