ArsT: “Outrageously” priced weight-loss drugs could bankrupt US health care

[tshile]

9 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I read the article. You asked a question and the company gave the answer they gave. The article literally gets into what the cost could be while still having a profit. If you want to argue with the researchers, knock yourself out. 
 

that’s not really how it works… they say there’s room for profit and tax but they don’t explain it and that’s not really how things work. The production cost of one item isn’t the only factor that drives how a company markets its stuff - in any market. And all these articles are just regurgitating the same thing. 
 

9 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

After arguing with researchers, you should go around and tell obese people that they all really do have time and they simply aren't prioritizing exercising. Let us know how that goes because it's clear that you have no idea of the struggle some people go through. 

so since you seem to know what’s in the research maybe you can answer this cause I didn’t find it:

why does it seem appropriate to use different production methods to justify why something should cost? Why didn’t they stick to the way this company manufactures it? Is that a common way to analyze things and justify this? Do we have lots of examples of companies changing their production methods because someone theoretically found a cheaper way and wrote an article about it?

 

how can you imply production cost is what it should cost, without knowing what was spent on r&d? Best I can tell, no one knows what was spent on R&D. I’ve asked but no one’s answered it, and I can’t find it in the researchers work or the article. 

 

if I missed all that clarification let me know, it’s a lot to read and I’m not well versed in it enough to pretend I maybe didn’t make a mistake or misunderstand. 
 

since you seem to know so much about it you can probably be helpful in providing information the articles regurgitating the basic stuff all passed on explaining?

Edited May 19 by tshile

[samy316]

10 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

After spending 10 days in Sydney and Hamilton Island, I came back to the States and went to El Pollo Loco like the next day. Every single person except me in that restaurant was obese lol...and when I say "everyone," I mean:

 

 

I remember just looking around and thinking holy crap, this really IS how the rest of the world sees Americans...as over-indulgent, lazy fat-asses. It was absolutely eye-opening experience for me. As a country and society, we don't prioritize eating healthy and exercise, probably because 1) there's no profit to be made from people handling their own bidniz, and 2) too large a segment of the population would see it as "socialist woke nonsense--you stay out of my fridge, Biden!!"

I definitely have to agree with this fact.  I’ve been to Dubai and Paris in the past 7 months, and I’m always taken aback by what I see here in America after spending time abroad.  In Dubai, you have thousands of Europeans vacationing there during the holidays, so it’s always a shock to the system when I see them at restaurants and in normal settings eating portions that you simply don’t see American eating. Everyone there looks in shape, and they look like they could survive off of one meal per day if it was necessary.

 

When I go to restaurants now here in the states, the two things that stand out to me the most are the size portions of our meals and the clientele at these restaurants.  Americans are HUGE now, and it’s getting harder and harder to ignore.  Obesity is definitely a big problem here, and I’m not sure there’s a fix to this problem that isn’t complex and/or daunting.

Edited May 19 by samy316

[tshile]

Just now, samy316 said:

 

When I go to restaurants now here in the states, the two things that stand out to me the most are the size portions of our meals and the clientele at these restaurants.  Americans are HUGE now, and it’s getting harder and harder to ignore.  Obesity is definitely a big problem here, and I’m not sure there’s a fix to this problem that isn’t complex and/or daunting.

it’s also interesting to see what type of people shop at which grocery stores 

 

there are very clear trends at least where I live. 

[samy316]

7 minutes ago, tshile said:

it’s also interesting to see what type of people shop at which grocery stores 

 

there are very clear trends at least where I live. 

That’s definitely true too.  In big cities and nicer suburbs, we have Whole Foods, Harris Teeter & Trader Joe’s that we can walk/bike to.  In other areas of the country, you have grocery stores like Publix, Giant, Bottom Dollar, etc that exemplify the difference between the healthy and the obese.  It’s no shock that food deserts exist, when you see who shops at Whole Foods/Trader Joe’s, and then you go to a grocery store in Arkansas or Mississippi, and they have rinky dink grocery stores that you have to drive to, while passing by a liquor store or a convenience mart that sells all kinds of junk food.

Edited May 19 by samy316

[LadySkinsFan]

With my increasing costs (housing and supplement health insurance) starting in July, my food budget per month is going to decrease by amount of $50-60/month. My lease increase is once again going to eat up my Social Security COLA, the insurance increase is on top of that by about $50/month. It's the best insurance you can get on top of Medicare and they don't offer that plan anymore. Essentially, I don't pay co-pay or deductibles, the supplement picks up what Medicare doesn't. Since I got this insurance (Plan F, no longer offered) I haven't paid one cent out of pocket (except drugs, different insurance but this year I only pay $6/year). This includes a few hospitalizations, surgery to remove lipoma, regular doctor visits every 6 months, and several medical issues that have popped up with regular doctor visits. 

 

The upshot is my food budget is definitely going to be impacted starting next month.  And I do cook everything and I'm a good cook. So it's off to the food banks for me. And they get meager because there are more people visiting them. 

 

It was the high fructose corn syrup and chemical fats added to foods. I'm losing weight just by avoiding these things by cooking everything. 

 

BTW, I typically by a pound of hamburger a month because I can't afford any other type of beef now and I make recipes that stretch that pound. I buy the value packs of chicken and pork and vacuum freeze that although now buying vacuum packs for the rest of the year is out of budget, my freezer is packed to get me by.

 

 

Edited May 19 by LadySkinsFan

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, samy316 said:

That’s definitely true too.  In big cities and nicer suburbs, you’re lucky to have Whole Foods, Harris Teeter & Trader Joe’s.  In other areas of the country, you have grocery stores like Publix, Giant, Bottom Dollar, etc that exemplify the difference between the healthy and the obese.  It’s no shock that food deserts exist, when you see who shops at Whole Foods/Trader Joe’s, and then you go to a grocery store in Arkansas or Mississippi, and they have rinky dink grocery stores that you have to drive to, while passing by a liquor store or a convenience mart that sells all kinds of junk food.

To me it’s like comparing chik fil a to the other fast food restraints. It’s a different experience. 
 

shopping at a place like Walmart vs Wegmans? The type of customer, the type of employee, the quality of the food and facility… it’s night and day. 
 

But the bigger picture of an area like you mention is also telling. everything from how clean or well kept things are, to whether or not it would fit for a yoga or spin class studio to exist. 
 

best to my knowledge the USA is unique in its obesity epidemic. Addictive foods, profiteering at every aspect, gluttony… it’s increasingly more common to see people riding around stores in carts cause they’re so obese that seems reasonable as opposed to them walking around to get their food 🤦🏼‍♂️
 

 

I’ve been hearing people rave about a Netflix docuseries on this, but haven’t watched it yet. It’s tied something akin to “you are what you eat” or something like that. 
 

after decades of society making poor choices about how they eat, and neglecting to exercise in even the most basic of ways (it’s like everyone forgot the importance of it taught in elementary school), it comes as no surprise there’s and uproar that a pill that would fix your obesity isn’t cheap enough for everyone to take 😆 

[tshile]

Add:

I find exercise has a direct and significant impact on my mental health. Handling stress and general outlook on life short term and long term are significantly better when I’m routinely working out. At this point in my life it’s probably the best improvement for me that it brings. 
 

I know a lot of people that feel the same way. It was part of the coaching our stress coach at work harps on, and she’s pretty well regarded in the area. 
 

baring one of these genetic issues (which certainly exist), the only person responsible for the condition of your body is you. One good change recently is society finally recognizing there isn’t just one way to look healthy - we’re not talking about super model outcomes here, we’re talking about taking care of yourself on a basic level such that you don’t have to take a pill to lose weight. 

i suppose people with a mental issue that drives them to obesity (seems like there’s several and different contexts to them) are in the same boat as the ones with genetic issues. To me those groups make total sense for this. But again - the analysis is if everyone that was obese took the pills it would bankrupt the system, which seems laughably absurd context to base the rest of this on. Most people could get by without pills if they put the effort in. That they don’t and want a cheap shortcut is a different issue. 

[dfitzo53]

59 minutes ago, tshile said:

Add:

I find exercise has a direct and significant impact on my mental health. Handling stress and general outlook on life short term and long term are significantly better when I’m routinely working out. At this point in my life it’s probably the best improvement for me that it brings. 
 

I know a lot of people that feel the same way. It was part of the coaching our stress coach at work harps on, and she’s pretty well regarded in the area. 
 

baring one of these genetic issues (which certainly exist), the only person responsible for the condition of your body is you. One good change recently is society finally recognizing there isn’t just one way to look healthy - we’re not talking about super model outcomes here, we’re talking about taking care of yourself on a basic level such that you don’t have to take a pill to lose weight. 

FWIW I don't think PeterMP was saying exercise has no benefits, just that it's not a key to weight loss. 

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, dfitzo53 said:

FWIW I don't think PeterMP was saying exercise has no benefits, just that it's not a key to weight loss. 

Yeah I get that - if you don’t think regular exercise is key to health and weight control then have fun with that idea. 
 

I think it’s key to a lot of things and in general should be on your list next to brushing your teeth, showering, eating, drinking water, and understanding how to make sure you **** in a toilet. 
 

it’s a basic part of taking care of yourself. “I don’t have time” is not an excuse. I say that as someone with good sections of my adult life using that excuse and pretending it’s anything other than the bull**** excuse it is. 
 

if someone told you they don’t brush their teeth cause they don’t have time, what would you think?

 

that’s how you should think about exercise. 

[Hersh]

2 hours ago, tshile said:

that’s not really how it works… they say there’s room for profit and tax but they don’t explain it and that’s not really how things work. The production cost of one item isn’t the only factor that drives how a company markets its stuff - in any market. And all these articles are just regurgitating the same thing. 
 

so since you seem to know what’s in the research maybe you can answer this cause I didn’t find it:

why does it seem appropriate to use different production methods to justify why something should cost? Why didn’t they stick to the way this company manufactures it? Is that a common way to analyze things and justify this? Do we have lots of examples of companies changing their production methods because someone theoretically found a cheaper way and wrote an article about it?

 

how can you imply production cost is what it should cost, without knowing what was spent on r&d? Best I can tell, no one knows what was spent on R&D. I’ve asked but no one’s answered it, and I can’t find it in the researchers work or the article. 

 

if I missed all that clarification let me know, it’s a lot to read and I’m not well versed in it enough to pretend I maybe didn’t make a mistake or misunderstand. 
 

since you seem to know so much about it you can probably be helpful in providing information the articles regurgitating the basic stuff all passed on explaining?

 

WTF are you going on and on about? Maybe instead of typing, you are the one that should go for a walk. Then email the researchers all your questions so you can argue with them. 

 

48 minutes ago, tshile said:

Yeah I get that - if you don’t think regular exercise is key to health and weight control then have fun with that idea. 
 

I think it’s key to a lot of things and in general should be on your list next to brushing your teeth, showering, eating, drinking water, and understanding how to make sure you **** in a toilet. 
 

it’s a basic part of taking care of yourself. “I don’t have time” is not an excuse. I say that as someone with good sections of my adult life using that excuse and pretending it’s anything other than the bull**** excuse it is. 
 

if someone told you they don’t brush their teeth cause they don’t have time, what would you think?

 

that’s how you should think about exercise. 

 

If you really think everyone has time every day and you lump it in with brushing teeth, you live in a bubble probably cause you make plenty of money to not face the same challenges those in less fortunate situations. 

 

 

[tshile]

1 minute ago, Hersh said:

 

WTF are you going on and on about? Maybe instead of typing, you are the one that should go for a walk. Then email the researchers all your questions so you can argue with them. 

 

 

If you really think everyone has time every day and you lump it in with brushing teeth, you live in a bubble probably cause you make plenty of money to not face the same challenges those in less fortunate situations. 

 

 

😆 you’re right, I make so much money I don’t face basic challenges like taking care of my body 😆 

 

what a crock of **** you spew. 
 

if you want to dodge personal responsibility be my guest. 
 

everyones busy. Anyone with kids and two working spouses is incredibly busy. You’re not special. 

It’s so clear you’ve put no effort into this beyond headline outrage. Cause you don’t even understand the questions I’m asking about. 
 

which tracks perfectly with “I’m too busy to exercise you just don’t get it”

[Hersh]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

😆 you’re right, I make so much money I don’t face basic challenges like taking care of my body 😆 

 

what a crock of **** you spew. 
 

if you want to dodge personal responsibility be my guest. 
 

everyones busy. Anyone with kids and two working spouses is incredibly busy. You’re not special. 

It’s so clear you’ve put no effort into this beyond headline outrage. Cause you don’t even understand the questions I’m asking about. 
 

which tracks perfectly with “I’m too busy to exercise you just don’t get it”

 

I'm not talking about me. I exercise plenty and I don't have any weight issues. I'm just not such a prick to think that it's simple for everyone to find time to exercise every day if they just made it a priority. Life is not that easy for a lot of people but feel free to make it a point to tell overweight people why they are such. I'm sure that will go over great. 

[Jumbo]

@tshile and @Hersh

 

You both qualify for rule 5 and 12 violations at this point.

 

I'm going to give you both a break this time, but dial it down.

[PeterMP]

21 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

So...a handful of nuts, a serving of peas, a slice of bread, and two apples.

 

- What if you or your kids don't like apples?

- What if your kid has a nut allergy?

- What if you add a diet Coke to the Big Mac?...No calories added so it's ok?

- What is the size of the "serving of peas"?

 

Gonna calculate your meal up there lol...using cheapest prices listed on local store site:

 

For a family of 3

1 oz nuts:

$3.73 for 8 oz.

1 oz = $.47

x 3 people = $1.41

 

(just a quick aside: you can get Ramen noodles for like $0.25 a package...so 3 packages of Ramen Noodles can feed 3 people for $0.75, almost half the cost of eating nuts.)

 

2 apples (each), so 6 apples:

$0.75 each

x3 people = $4.50

 

(another aside: $5.91 so far for a family of three to eat the meal you're proposing...and $0.75 cents to eat Ramen noodles instead lol)

 

1 slice of whole wheat bread:

Loaf of generic wheat bread - $1.79

Average of 21 slices a loaf

1 slice = $0.09 per slice

x3 people = $0.27

 

1 tbsp of butter:

8 ounce tub of butter = $2.79

1 tbsp = 1/2 ounce, so 1 tbsp = $0.17

x3 people - $0.51

 

Serving of peas:

Frozen peas = $1.00 for 12 oz

4 servings per bag

1 serving = $0.25

x3 people - $0.75

 

Grand total spent on the apples, nuts, peas, and bread meal: $7.74

Grand total spent on the unhealthy Ramen Noodles meal: $0.75

 

You could toss in some generic "hot dogs" with the Ramen noodles--8 for $1.49. Let's say each family member gets two hot dogs...

 

Grand total spent on the apples, nuts, peas, and bread meal: $7.74

Grand total spent on the unhealthy Ramen Noodles and hot dogs meal: $1.50

 

That $7.74 could feed your family once...or it could feed your family 5 times. And that's the thing missing: parents who are struggling aren't asking themselves "Can I afford this?"...They are asking themselves "What's the best way to spend this money and make it go as far as humanly possible?" Stretching their dollar are priorities number 1-thru-A Billion on their list.

 

 

 

 

So a few things, generally kids like eating what they grow up eating, so one key is getting kids eating healthy and a variety of healthy things early.  If you child starts eating apples early, it is unlikely they will dislike apples later.  As I've already said there are whole cookbooks out there are on easting and cooking healthy on a budget.  My list wasn't meant to be comprehensive, beans, chickpeas, things made from them (e.g. humus), carrots, celery, etc. can be found at most grocery stores and things like Super Walmarts today for reasonable prices.

 

There are always going to be exceptions and people that have problems.  But I'm not talking about them.  I'm talking about the majority of people.

 

I don't think you are describing the majority of Americans or even obese Americans.  We have many more issues with obesity because we do more things like eat more sugary drinks per capita than any other country in the world.  That isn't a time or money issue.  We don't have (many) more people living at or below poverty than (many) other countries.  Our food costs are not (much) higher than many other countries.  But we have many more obese people than many other countries.  (Again, there are exceptions where time and money and other things probably do matter.)

 

I don't keep up with the science on diet sodas.  But my understanding is artificial sweeteners are tied to obesity in large epidemiological studies and have been shown to affect the gut microbiome.  So I'd generally suggest staying away from them, especially if you struggle with maintaining a healthy weight.  But especially in the context of not being able to afford eating healthy then not drinking any soda makes a lot of sense.  You'll save money that can be put to eating healty.

 

But really your 2 hotdogs and raman example exactly makes my point.  2 hot dogs and raman are about 600 calories.  For many people that's going to lead to excess weight and obesity over time if that's a normal meal, especially if there is any snacking in between.  But if that's what you are eating, and you start to get over a healthy weight, the solution is easy.  Only eat 1 hot dog with your raman soup.  And since you are eating 1 less hot dog with every meal, you are spending less money.  That's money you can put back into eating healthy.  A reasonable multivitamin and fiber supplements costs about $0.15 a serving.  1 hot dog, raman soup, a multivitamin, and a serving of fiber supplement mixed with water is about 500 calories reducing your chances of putting on weight, will probably make you healthier over the long term, and still saves you money.

 

Eating healthy is always going to be better, but no matter what you eat simply eating less of it will make you less likely to be obese.  There is nobody that is getting over a healthy weight that financially can't afford to eat less of what they are eating or doesn't have the time to eat less/prepare less of whatever they are eating.  Any argument to the contrary is nonsense.

Edited May 20 by PeterMP

[PeterMP]

9 hours ago, tshile said:

Yeah I get that - if you don’t think regular exercise is key to health and weight control then have fun with that idea. 
 

I think it’s key to a lot of things and in general should be on your list next to brushing your teeth, showering, eating, drinking water, and understanding how to make sure you **** in a toilet. 
 

it’s a basic part of taking care of yourself. “I don’t have time” is not an excuse. I say that as someone with good sections of my adult life using that excuse and pretending it’s anything other than the bull**** excuse it is. 
 

if someone told you they don’t brush their teeth cause they don’t have time, what would you think?

 

that’s how you should think about exercise. 

 

I'm not saying that exercise isn't important in terms of being healthy and even maintaining weight.  People should exercise.  It is important in terms maintaining your weight and other things. 

 

But if your answer to gaining weight is that you are going to exercise more, you're probably going to fail.

 

https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11518804/weight-loss-exercise-myth-burn-calories

[SkinsFTW]

3 hours ago, PeterMP said:

Our food costs are not (much) higher than many other countries. 

 

Food in the US is probably cheaper than anywhere else on the planet as a percentage of income.

 

I've lived long term in several countries and all of them were much more expensive than the US. I mean, compared to what the average person earns in that country. Meat and fruit/vegetable prices in Japan are astronomical. Even rice is more expensive in Japan.

 

Even in a country like the Philippines McDonald's is still 7+ bucks for a combo meal but the average 4 year degree worker there earns 200-300 dollars a month.

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

I don't think you are describing the majority of Americans or even obese Americans. 

 

I was describing why saying "eating healthy can be relatively cheap" doesn't take into consideration the very real things people who have to eat cheaply are thinking about and putting importance on.

 

Quote

generally kids like eating what they grow up eating, so one key is getting kids eating healthy and a variety of healthy things early.

 

Kids start liking and hating foods at an extremely early age. It's not like they don't have taste buds and will simply eat whatever mom puts in front of them and generally like it. We've all seen infants turn their heads when their parents are trying to feed them lol...and spit out food they don't want...and make faces when something doesn't taste good to them. And if you try and make it mandatory that they eat their apples/bananas/whatever, they are more likely to grow up hating those foods.

 

In reality, if you want to try and get your kids to like eating healthy foods, then the mom should eat a gargantuan amount of healthy foods while she's pregnant. A fetus has a tongue and tastebuds, and it will taste the same things the mom eats while she's pregnant via the amniotic fluid.

 

 

Quote

I don't keep up with the science on diet sodas.  But my understanding is artificial sweeteners are tied to obesity in large epidemiological studies and have been shown to affect the gut microbiome.

 

But the argument you made was based on calories--specifically, comparing the amount of calories in the nuts/bread/peas meal to one Big Mac, saying they were basically equal in calories so both should be considered a meal in themselves and no need to raise the calories by adding french fries and a soda to the Big Mac. So if calories were the determining factor, then adding a diet soda shouldn't be a problem. The fact that it is (or at least can be) means calories is the wrong foundation on which to base the argument.

 

Quote

We don't have (many) more people living at or below poverty than (many) other countries.

 

Of the 38 countries that are in the OECD, the United States has the 2nd highest poverty rate...which are the countries we should be comparing the U.S. with when it comes to this topic.

 

Quote

Our food costs are not (much) higher than many other countries.  But we have many more obese people than many other countries.

 

Yes, and one reason our food costs aren't (much) higher than many other countries is because of all that unhealthy food we sell incredibly cheaply. And that's because the U.S. leads the world in processed food production and consumption--which is far more affordable to produce and consume but far less healthy. Just read that something like 60% of the U.S. caloric intake is from processed foods. Processed foods play a significant role in obesity...but, hey, it keeps our food costs down compared to other countries. So...there's that.

 

Quote

But really your 2 hotdogs and raman example exactly makes my point.  2 hot dogs and raman are about 600 calories.  For many people that's going to lead to excess weight and obesity over time if that's a normal meal, especially if there is any snacking in between.  But if that's what you are eating, and you start to get over a healthy weight, the solution is easy.  Only eat 1 hot dog with your raman soup.  And since you are eating 1 less hot dog with every meal, you are spending less money. 

 

Again, you can't make the argument that equal calories equates to equal costs. The point I made was that you can feed your family 5 times longer spending the same amount of money if you buy foods that are less healthy. And that absolutely plays a MASSIVE role in people's purchasing decisions. "How can I stretch my food budget as far as I can?"...that's really the most important aspect in all of this. And you don't need to be living in poverty for that to be a priority. Point being, "All you have to do is (fill in the blank)" ignores like 90% of what a lot of people realistically have to go through and have to deal with just to exist.

 

Edited May 20 by Califan007 The Constipated

[tshile]

4 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

Kids start liking and hating foods at an extremely early age. It's not like they don't have taste buds and will simply eat whatever mom puts in front of them and generally like it. We've all seen infants turn their heads when their parents are trying to feed them lol...and spit out food they don't want...and make faces when something doesn't taste good to them. And if you try and make it mandatory that they eat their apples/bananas/whatever, they are more likely to grow up hating those foods.

lol what?

you realize your taste buds change as your grow?

This seems like an incredible hand waving leap you’ve made here

 

id also like to point out that not liking foods and understanding what you need to eat to be healthy is a core concept of being an adult. We do (… or at least we should…) lots of things we “don’t like” because we have to. If you’re an adult refusing to eat healthy foods cause you didn’t like them as a child then you’re a lost cause anyways. 

[PeterMP]

7 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

I was describing why saying "eating healthy can be relatively cheap" doesn't take into consideration the very real things people who have to eat cheaply are thinking about and putting importance on.

 

 

Kids start liking and hating foods at an extremely early age. It's not like they don't have taste buds and will simply eat whatever mom puts in front of them and generally like it. We've all seen infants turn their heads when their parents are trying to feed them lol...and spit out food they don't want...and make faces when something doesn't taste good to them. And if you try and make it mandatory that they eat their apples/bananas/whatever, they are more likely to grow up hating those foods.

 

In reality, if you want to try and get your kids to like eating healthy foods, then the mom should eat a gargantuan amount of healthy foods while she's pregnant. A fetus has a tongue and tastebuds, and it will taste the same things the mom eats while she's pregnant via the amniotic fluid.

 

 

 

But the argument you made was based on calories--specifically, comparing the amount of calories in the nuts/bread/peas meal to one Big Mac, saying they were basically equal in calories so both should be considered a meal in themselves and no need to raise the calories by adding french fries and a soda to the Big Mac. So if calories were the determining factor, then adding a diet soda shouldn't be a problem. The fact that it is (or at least can be) means calories is the wrong foundation on which to base the argument.

 

 

Of the 38 countries that are in the OECD, the United States has the 2nd highest poverty rate...which are the countries we should be comparing the U.S. with when it comes to this topic.

 

 

Yes, and one reason our food costs aren't (much) higher than many other countries is because of all that unhealthy food we sell incredibly cheaply. And that's because the U.S. leads the world in processed food production and consumption--which is far more affordable to produce and consume but far less healthy. Just read that something like 60% of the U.S. caloric intake is from processed foods. Processed foods play a significant role in obesity...but, hey, it keeps our food costs down compared to other countries. So...there's that.

 

 

Again, you can't make the argument that equal calories equates to equal costs. The point I made was that you can feed your family 5 times longer spending the same amount of money if you buy foods that are less healthy. And that absolutely plays a MASSIVE role in people's purchasing decisions. "How can I stretch my food budget as far as I can?"...that's really the most important aspect in all of this. And you don't need to be living in poverty for that to be a priority. Point being, "All you have to do is (fill in the blank)" ignores like 90% of what a lot of people realistically have to go through and have to deal with just to exist.

 

 

Relatively cheap.  My point was never that there weren't some people that it would be an issue for.  I conceded at the end of the post, that for some people it is an issue, but it isn't the majority of people.

 

"There are people where that's true.  But it is the minority of Americans."

 

Calories aren't the only determining factor, but they are an important part of it.  I already mentioned things like things in food.

 

People eating hot dogs and raman soup because that's what they can afford is not the majority of the problem. 

 

The larger problem is that we lead the world in drinking sugary drinks.  We lead the world in eating fast food. Those aren't time/money issues.  If you are spending money on sugar beverages and fastfood, you can likely afford to eat a healthy.  Maybe not organics, berries and salmon healthy but apples, celery, carrots, nuts, frozen veggies, and beans healthy.

 

And yes, the cheapness of eating processed food and the things in the process food are an issue.  But eating less does make it less likely you will be obese and actually saves money that can be put into eating healthy.  The average American eats nearly 4,000 calories a day.  That should be much lower and if it is much lower that's less money spent on food that could be used to eat healthier.  That isn't a time or money thing.  The extra calories are actually extra money.  So if your argument is people are over eating because they are eating processed food because it is cheaper, the solution is relatively simple.  Eat less process food and more healthy food (or supplements that give them nutrients that will probably make them healthier and help control their appetite) and spend about the same or even less. 

 

Anybody that is spending money on processed food to save money to eat 4,000 calories a day and ends up obese isn't actually saving themselves money.  They are costing themselves money.  The issue isn't their time or money.  It is their decision making.  The person eating 2 hotdogs and a raman soup regularly for a meal that thinks they are saving money is wrong.  They've over eaten, spent more money on food then they had to, and made a bad decision.  They didn't save themselves time or money.  Their problem is education/decision making. 

 

(I will point out that I selected multivitamins and fiber supplements for a reason.  There is evidence both can help control appetites and fiber (even as a supplement) in some cases appears to level out glycemic load and is good for your microbiome.  Part of your argument appears to be that processed foods leave you feeling hungry and so people over eat them.  The answer to that is then to spend less on processed foods and spend money on other things that will balance that out, end up eating less, and saving money.  A multivitamin and fiber supplement are cheap things that appear as if they will help that are readily available at places many people buy food.  High fiber vegetables would also be good.)

Edited May 20 by PeterMP

[Destino]

On 5/18/2024 at 9:58 PM, tshile said:

So what is the appropriate price for the drug?

 

how much was spent on r&d?

More than covering costs, but less than a number that enrages the public and causes them to support new laws that control your prices.

[Corcaigh]

Sounds like something that can be fixed by contracting if there is a public need rather than setting market pricing after the fact when the pharma company has taken on all the R&D and drug approval cost and duration tisk.

 

Military hardware is developed under a cost-plus model and I think the COVID vaccines were the same.

[Bang]

Speaking for myself, i have been overweight since my 20s, and I exercise. I watch what I eat, I'm not the best, but I don't stuff myself with junk. My typical diet is good, I don't load on carbs or fried foods so much, I eat healthy meals, heavy on the veggies. 

Starting in my early 40s I started to play tennis, ran a lot on the court. Now I play pickleball probably 8-10 hours per week. (I'm 60, so literally for close to 20 years I have been active in high energy sports.)

And I can't lose weight. I mean, it does happen, but at an unbelievably slow rate. Conversely, if I go out and have a treat. Nice dinner or something, drink a bottle of wine over a weekend...   it comes back on practically immediately.

My immediate family.. they are immense. My mom, sister..  I am svelte in comparison.  SO I tell myself that all the work I do does have consequence, otherwise i'd be up near 300 lb. (I am 5/10 and carry about 230 and have for what seems like my entire adult life. For me to get below 230 takes monumental effort, but going back to it takes almost nothing at all.)

I am not one who thinks the results of sloth and gluttony should be wished away so easily, but man, I am desperate and have been forever. 
I don't need to be cut or perfect, I would just rather drop down to about 200-210, and in my mind there is no way to do it other than total starvation, only to watch it come back with my first bite of food. 

It is frustrating.

Whether a drug is the answer or not, I don't know. But for someone like me, it's interesting. 

 

 

~Bang

Edited May 20 by Bang

[tshile]

Someone in @Bang’s situation makes sense for this. 
 

I think part of the problem is the context people are speaking to. For me - the article and the senate report:

- assume half of people with obesity will take the drug

- use market pricing without insurance (they say 900+/month while the manufacturer says 50% of current users pay 25$/month and 75% pay less than 50$/month)

- use research about production costs that:

— isn’t the actual production cost, because no one knows that because the manufacturer won’t release it

— isn’t the same production methods, and I haven’t found why that’s an OK way to do it yet. 
— doesn’t factor in R&D for this drug not decades of R&D to get here - this didn’t just pop out of nowhere, weight loss drugs have been in demand and researched for a while now and we just now apparently have something coming to market that works

- compares our system to systems that are very different than ours, without explaining any of it, to just create an argument about Americans getting screwed 

 

then declares the price is too high and will bankrupt the system. 
 

It’s not just a flimsy foundation it’s an outright dishonest way of presenting information, and clearly used to drum up outrage.

 

Big pharmaceutical industry needs significant regulation. Them and the medical device manufacturers mostly escaped the affordable care act - I presume because they paid enough people to dodge it. You’ll get no argument out of me that they need to be thoroughly investigated and regulated - look at the opioid crisis and what came out of all that …

 

This reminds me of the congress people hauling tech people in for pointless hearings. If you’re not going to make an effort to actually understand the subject and speak intelligently about it, they’re just going to run circles around you and make you look stupid and nothing will change. 
 

not everyone who is obese needs a pill to fix it. The cost comparisons don’t work, the production cost analysis ranges from <1$ to >40$ and is all over the map. No research and development is included in any of this analysis best I can tell. The whole conversation is severely lacking in meaningful information. 🤷‍♂️ 

[PeterMP]

20 minutes ago, tshile said:

not everyone who is obese needs a pill to fix it

 

Maybe not everyone, but the vast majority of people that are obese are going to need a pill to fix it.  I've been pretty careful in my posts to talk about starting to gain weight and making changes.  Once you are obese or overweight and even before that, it gets really hard.

 

Once you've put on weight it is very hard for most people to lose it.  There are real metabolic and signaling changes (and really even epigenetic changes to the DNA)  that make it very hard to lose gained weight in most people.  And those things start early even when you are not obese.  

 

(I believe Bang is about my age.  Maybe even a little older.  Realistically, my generation grew up eating junk because for the most part, our parents didn't know any better.  My wife and I joke we don't ever remember being told to drink and much less drink water as a kid.  You were sent out to play all day with nothing to drink.  We probably spent our childhood chronically dehydrated.  And when you did drink, it was often things like Kool Aid.  Tang was considered "healthy".  In many people that sort of eating causes real changes that make it hard to lose weight going forward (skinny fat is a real thing.))

 

And realistically today for many people it is going to be even worse.  We have a generation where we've had more kids obese then ever in the past.  In terms of obesity, we're going to have huge problems going forward.  (And as some of the changes are epigenetic, we might be looking at inheritable things that will even affect generations of people that are not born yet.)

 

We need to get people to work on eating better as young kids and then maintaining healthy weights and eating as they grow.

Edited May 20 by PeterMP

[Chump Bailey]

On 5/18/2024 at 4:27 PM, PeterMP said:

I understand people don't like big pharma.  But I'm having a hard time blaming them for this issue.  I guess there is some over lap between them and the food industry, but at some level, this is the result of personal choice, stupidity, and political will.

 

My biggest issues with Big Pharma:

 

Entirely too much influence and control over a medical doctor's education and practice

End the public subsidies and cease all T.V. advertising and tax gifts - all while fleecing Americans with the highest drug costs in the world

Too much indemnity and that also needs to end