Your points are valid and believe it or not I largely agree. We are largely products of our environment. If there are potato chips in the house, I am more likely to eat potato chips. At scale, if there is a McDonald's on the corner or chips in the grocery store, people are more likely to eat said junk food out of both convenience and dopamine fixation and median societal stress levels leading to elevated cortisol and so on.

I don't think they changes the points I'm trying to raise, which are:

• Concerns for symptom masking leading to a false sense of believing you are healthy and not nutritionally deficient.

• Deflecting attention away from the root issues causing obesity: deregulation of processed foods and socioeconomic inequality and societal stressors (all which COULD and should be addressed).

Put another way: My primary concern is people being lulled into a false sense of security. If pain is a signal to change something, then looking in the mirror and seeing your weight can be a similar motivator for change all the same for people. If people taking this drug get positive feedback, they may then lack that normal feedback for motivation to change their underlying dietary habits. If this means that while obesity drops, the number of people who adopt better dietary habits overall decreases in kind, then we're setting ourselves up for various disease epidemics down the road. Systemically, there's no doubt you're right that most people struggle to get through this; but that's not to say there aren't people who do manage to make lifestyle changes for the better. It is possible; and are so-called (as the other user called them) "miracle drugs" further impeding that? Are we losing the thread?

If all we do going through life is chasing a revolving number of symptoms and side-effects, we will never get to the heart of the root problems.

But as I wrote elsewhere, I am open to the notion that because these problems begin in a unnatural manner in the way they short-circuit our evolutionary biological circuitry, then perhaps the solutions are unnatural as well. For me to change my opinion, would need studies showing that people are more likely to adopt healthy lifestyle choices, particularly diet, following taking Ozempic for a period of time.

Nobody around me is suffering from malnutrition. Meat is very nutritious. That is why our bodies crave it.

This is going beyond the scope of our conversation probably, but this is flatly not true. My body doesn't crave it any more than it can be programmed to crave a popsicle, soda, ultra-salty fast-food burger. One can crave heroin or meth, too; it doesn't mean it's good for you. Let us please not enable carnivore pseudoscience bullshit. Not to say some meat, notably cold-water fish, isn't good for you however; in limited quantities in accordance to the Mediterranean diet, yes, it can be healthy.

Extreme malnutrition tends to have to do with deficiencies in macronutrients; raw calories. Back in the day, we didn't live long enough for micronutrients to have such a profound impact. Macronutrients, in terms of calories, true are easy to get. But people are profoundly deficient on a variety of micro and phytonutrients, ranging from fiber to antioxidant intake to B12 (yes, even 1/3 of meat eaters are deficient), to Omega-3s, to Potassium. These are facts, and if you need sources they're easily found.