Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

news.cornell.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 985 posts

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#151

Post by lumost »

carlmr wrote: post #6

>The share of U.S. households reporting at least one user rose from about 11% in late 2023 to more than 16% by mid-2024. I was wondering how you could get such a high impact overall. But it seems one in 6 households are on GLP-1 drugs in the US. In my friend circle in Germany I don't even know one single person on this stuff. It's insane to me that so many people need these to get off the processed foods killing them…

Eh, the drugs work. A great many people in the US struggle with weight despite shifting to high quality foods, fad diets, exercise etc. I'd honestly attribute the root cause to high general stress levels in daily life.

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#152

Post by JumpCrisscross »

jhanschoo wrote: post #134
mistahenry wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in Germany and Indonesia. It’s easier for me now back in the US than ever to eat healthy. I can buy pre-chopped Cole slaw, diced peppers / onions, etc. Whole Foods is best in class (Alnatura doesn’t come close) While to me, the layman, it seems health regulation in general in Europe is more conservative about what can be put on the body / be consumed, I think it’s mostly Americans don’t want to eat healthy. A…

> I can buy pre-chopped Cole slaw, diced peppers / onions, etc. These accessible food options come with a premium that I strongly suspect put them out of what a median income household can sustainably afford.

> These accessible food options come with a premium

On one hand, you a processing step. On the other hand, you can process 'ugly' produce into mince. (Mince also transports more compactly volume-wise.)

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#154

Post by bargainbin »

Ensorceled wrote: post #69
nemomarx wrote: post #2

> “The data show clear changes in food spending following adoption,” Hristakeva said. “After discontinuation, the effects become smaller and harder to distinguish from pre-adoption spending patterns.” It's interesting that overall spending doesn't decrease that much in the end, although shifting from snacks to fruit is the kind of change health advocates have always wanted?

> It's interesting that overall spending doesn't decrease that much in the end Only after discontinuation. GLP-1s should be considered chronic medication for most people.

There was an interesting study recently that showed coming off actually caused weight re-gain an order of magnitude worse than yo-yo dieting.

The media spun it as GLP-1’s being evil and pointless, quelle surprise, but really it hints towards obesity being more than just “fixing your relationship with food” and acknowledging that there is more we don’t understand about why some people are fatter than others despite similar lifestyles.

Going to be an interesting decade as more data is gathered on these, that’s for sure.

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#155

Post by jasongill »

tzs wrote: post #104
quitit wrote: post #36

This headline is a touch misleading as it gives the impression of being across all US households, the quote is: >Within six months of starting a GLP-1 medication, households reduce grocery spending by an average of 5.3%. Among higher-income households, the drop is even steeper, at more than 8%. Spending at fast-food restaurants, coffee shops and other limited-service eateries falls by about 8%.

That works out to something like $30-100 a month for most households. A bit disappointing for those hoping the savings on food would pay for the drug at the current drug prices.

The cash-payer (no insurance) price of GLP-1's has fallen by about 70% since I started on them 18 months ago, from around $1100/mo to $350/mo, for brand-name non-compounded (Ozempic, Zepbound, etc). Many people also stretch that 1 month supply to last longer, as well (eg "click counting").

Not to say that it's cheap, but they are no longer the high-priced drugs only for the glitterati that you may be thinking.

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#156

Post by lm28469 »

brianpbeau wrote: post #71
carlmr wrote: post #6

>The share of U.S. households reporting at least one user rose from about 11% in late 2023 to more than 16% by mid-2024. I was wondering how you could get such a high impact overall. But it seems one in 6 households are on GLP-1 drugs in the US. In my friend circle in Germany I don't even know one single person on this stuff. It's insane to me that so many people need these to get off the processed foods killing them…

It's not just processed foods, there is also a genetic struggle as well. Looking at my family living in the US and in the EU, being overweight is a thing for a large portion of us. Even in my grandparents generation of family had issues as well, and they were all blue collar manual workers that lived before processed foods. This is not to say you are wrong. The food supply in the US is not healthy. The bad news is th…

> there is also a genetic struggle as well.

Weird that it virtually did not exist pre ww2 and that it now affects 75%+ of your population

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#157

Post by trillic »

notdang wrote: post #92
dizlexic wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... do you have any evidence to back up this claim?

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/... Here are some first steps: Earlier this year, Conagra started labeling some of its Healthy Choice frozen meals with high protein and fiber as "GLP-1 friendly." A spokesperson said those meals are selling faster than rival products making similar claims on their packaging. The company plans to introduce new Healthy Choice recipes with the same labeling in…

bowl-slop is getting smaller and is now cup-slop

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#158

Post by lm28469 »

xenospn wrote: post #147
heraldgeezer wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans (and increasingly us Europeans) are pigs. The society is built to sit in a chair 8h, get in your car and drive 1h home and sit in a chair. Then repeat. Also "eating 3 meals a day" I eat 3 full meals, I blow up like a balloon. I don't get it. It's like they have to constantly eat. When I was a teen or in my 20s yes. Now in my 30s its game over. It is also the way society, public transport, cities are designe…

The entire world eats 3 meals a day. Even if you eat 6 meals a day you can easily lose weight. It’s about the contents of the meal, not the frequency.

I eat one meal a day for as far as I can remember. Fatties love to tell me it's unhealthy, my doctor hasn't figure out yet though so I imagine it really isn't that unhealthy.

Eating three meals a day is a very very very recent thing if you account for human history, or even modern human history

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#159

Post by [deleted] »

temp8830 wrote: post #109
only-one1701 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d advise folks to consider a) the relationship between poverty, stress, and obesity Nd b) the income inequality of the United States relative to Germany

Absolutely. The American way of life traps people in a zoo. There is nothing to do other than work (if you are lucky), eat, and consume junk media. For ones who are poor the only difference is the degree to which the food is also junk.

[deleted]

Re: Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy

#160

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

bluedino wrote: post #99
spockz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around here fruit is significantly more expensive than snacks. In fact, replacing the snacks with healthy food in our case increased spending. So it is awesome that these households managed to cut spendings.

I can buy a bag of apples for less than what a pack of Little Debbie snacks cost.

I decided to check one of my local grocery stores because I honestly wasn't sure where they stood relative to each other.

Most Little Debbie varieties, for a standard package containing 6 or 12 items depending on the size of the items, are listed at $3.19.

Apples are commonly sold in 3 pound bags, which the internet suggests would contain 6-12 apples depending on the variety of apple and individual sizing. The 3 pound bag seems like a reasonable comparison to the standard Little Debbie packages, as it's 6-12 "snacks" in either case.

The cheapest option is Red Delicious at $3.99. You can spend up to $6.99 for 3 pounds of a more premium variety.

Little Debbies cost $0.26 to $0.53 per snack. Cheap apples are $0.33 to $0.66 per.

The advantage is also present with larger quantities. A large package of Little Debbie snacks costs $5.49, and a 5lb bag of Red Delicious apples costs $5.99. You're getting 2x the Little Debbie snacks in the larger package, but you're only getting 66% more apples in a 5lb bag.

At the larger quantity, LD's per snack price range is $0.23 to $0.45. Red Delicious apples are $0.30 to $0.60.

Post reply on HN