logo
Chrissy Metz Warns About The 'Slippery Slope' Of Ozempic Use After Her 100-Pound Weight Loss

Chrissy Metz Warns About The 'Slippery Slope' Of Ozempic Use After Her 100-Pound Weight Loss

Yahoo4 hours ago
Chrissy Metz has opened up about her health journey, sharing her nuanced views on weight loss drugs, inspired partly by her father's death after a gastric bypass.
Focused on long-term wellness, the actress meal-preps with her boyfriend, practices intuitive eating, and prioritizes strength training over cardio to stay strong and mobile.
Chrissy Metz also split time between Los Angeles and Nashville for a better quality of life and career flexibility.
Chrissy Metz Shares Her 'Complicated Feelings' On Weight Loss Medications
Metz recently shared her "complicated feelings" on weight loss medications, following reports that she's shed 100 pounds.
Speaking to People Magazine, the 44-year-old actress clarified misconceptions about her health journey and weighed in on the growing popularity of GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic in Hollywood.
"If you're diabetic and need to lower your A1C, these are things that are important to take care of," she explained. "But if you already have a restrictive eating disorder and take something that minimizes your appetite, it can become a very slippery slope."
Still, the "This Is Us" actress emphasized that if she ever chooses to use such medication, it will remain a personal decision.
"I never said I was the poster child for body positivity. I just want to do what I can do to live the longest, healthiest life," she said.
Reflecting on her father's heartbreaking death from sepsis following gastric bypass surgery, Metz admitted she's determined to avoid a similar outcome.
"I'm at a stage in life where I don't want that to be me," she shared. "I wonder if he'd had GLP-1s, whether he'd still be around."
The Actress Champions Health-Positive Living, And Self-Worth Beyond The Scale
Focusing on long-term wellness, Metz revealed that she and her boyfriend, an electrical engineer, spend weekends meal-prepping together and that she's recently incorporated weightlifting into her routine.
"I need to strength-train, eat more protein. I want to be mobile," Metz said, explaining that she now relies on intuitive eating and regularly asks herself, "Is what I'm putting in my body harmful or helpful?"
Her priority, she emphasized, is building healthy habits rather than obsessing over the scale.
"I want to be health-positive. It's not that I condone morbid obesity or heroin chic. I condone a healthy body. There are plenty of people who are bigger-bodied and perfectly healthy," she said.
Chrissy Metz Says She's Had 'Thin, Beautiful Women' Tell Her How Important Her Story Has Been For Them
Having been open about her past struggles with disordered eating, Metz also reminded fans that worth isn't tied to body size, noting that too many people mistakenly think that if "they're not thin enough, they're not good enough."
She explained: "I've had thin, beautiful women with their jogging strollers tell me, 'You don't know how much your story helped me,' I'm just like, 'What?!' But you realize that everyone has their struggles, their anxiety, or depression, or grief over losing someone. Skinniness doesn't equal happiness."
In the end, Metz says her journey is about progress, not perfection.
"If I say that everyone is deserving of happiness, that must mean that I am too," she said.
The Actress Talks Strength Training And Staying Healthy For The Future
In an interview with Daily Mail, Metz revealed she's been more consistent than ever with weight training.
"I have always enjoyed strength training. I've always enjoyed lifting weights," Metz told the news outlet, adding that she has a preference for cardio. "I don't want to run unless I'm being chased."
The "American Horror Story" actress also shared that she connects deeply with her trainer, who has gone through his own weight loss journey.
"We have things in common where it's not just like, 'Why are you doing this?' she explained. "Like, I don't want to be yelled at. I want to be lovingly supported in whatever it is that I'm doing."
Metz further noted that her motivation goes beyond the workouts themselves as she's focused on long-term health.
"I want to age the best way that I can, and I want to be strong. And that's really the impetus behind any of it," she emphasized, adding that she is "nervous" about aging, and about "osteoporosis or arthritis."
Chrissy Metz Embraces Life Between Los Angeles And Nashville For A Better Lifestyle And Career Focus
Another recent shift for Metz has been dividing her time between Los Angeles and Nashville, Tennessee, after spending more than 20 years on the West Coast.
"The reason why I'm there so often is that everything is very close in proximity," she told E! News in April. "You can go to three different shows, to great restaurants, in one night. It doesn't take two hours to get anywhere. It's really great."
For the Florida native, the move is also about lifestyle.
"It's just like quality of life as well, you know?" she said. "The Southern hospitality. I grew up in the South. It's very familiar to me. There's a lot of great, great aspects of Nashville."
She's also found that the shift supports her evolving career priorities.
"There's also not work happening in Los Angeles," she explained. "There's just not much shooting here, unfortunately. And because I've been focusing on music, my family's close in Florida. Yeah, it's just where I split my time."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

HIMS: Hims & Hers Shares Sink After FTC Probe Details Emerge
HIMS: Hims & Hers Shares Sink After FTC Probe Details Emerge

Yahoo

time3 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

HIMS: Hims & Hers Shares Sink After FTC Probe Details Emerge

Aug 15 - Hims & Hers Health (NYSE:HIMS) slipped about 3% in early trading on Friday after Bloomberg published fresh details about a Federal Trade Commission probe into the company's business practices. The report says the FTC opened an inquiry following consumer complaints that Hims & Hers makes it hard for customers to cancel subscriptions and questions the company's advertising practices. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 4 Warning Sign with HIMS. Hims & Hers first told investors about a regulatory review in July 2024, but Bloomberg's report adds new color on what regulators are investigating. According to people familiar with the matter, the agency looks at cancellation flows, disclosure language, and whether marketing crosses legal lines. The company hasn't released a new statement tied to the Bloomberg story. For investors, the short-term hit reflects the subscription model's vulnerability: when regulators probe cancellation or billing, churn can rise and trust can fall. Analysts will watch complaint volumes, any formal FTC subpoenas, and whether the firm needs to change its renewal mechanics or face penalties. Until that clarity arrives, expect volatility around HIMS shares as traders price regulatory risk into the stock. Based on the one year price targets offered by 13 analysts, the average target price for Hims & Hers Health Inc is $51.22 with a high estimate of $85.00 and a low estimate of $28.00. The average target implies a upside of +8.67% from the current price of $47.13. Based on GuruFocus estimates, the estimated GF Value for Hims & Hers Health Inc in one year is $36.25, suggesting a downside of -23.09% from the current price of $47.13. Gf value is Gurufocus' estimate of the fair value that the stock should be traded at. It is calculated based on the historical multiples the stock has traded at previously, as well as past business growth and the future estimates of the business' performance. For deeper insights, visit the forecast page. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

Berkshire Hathaway Takes $1.6 Billion Stake in UnitedHealth
Berkshire Hathaway Takes $1.6 Billion Stake in UnitedHealth

Yahoo

time3 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Berkshire Hathaway Takes $1.6 Billion Stake in UnitedHealth

Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A, Financials) acquired more than 5 million shares of UnitedHealth (UNH, Financials) last quarter, a stake worth about $1.6 billion at the end of June, according to a regulatory filing Thursday. The holding ranks as the conglomerate's 18th largest position, behind Amazon and Constellation Brands, VerityData reported. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 5 Warning Sign with UNH. UnitedHealth shares rose 6% in extended trading following the disclosure. The stock had fallen nearly 50% this year before the filing. The health insurer, under Justice Department investigation for Medicare billing practices, withdrew its earnings guidance in May and later issued a 2025 outlook that missed Wall Street estimates. Chief Executive Andrew Witty stepped down earlier this year. Berkshire's equity portfolio was valued at about $300 billion at the end of June. Buffett will retire as CEO at year-end, with Vice Chairman Greg Abel set to take over and manage capital allocation decisions. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio

RFK Jr.'s plans to overhaul ‘vaccine court' system would face legal and scientific challenges
RFK Jr.'s plans to overhaul ‘vaccine court' system would face legal and scientific challenges

Yahoo

time3 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

RFK Jr.'s plans to overhaul ‘vaccine court' system would face legal and scientific challenges

For almost 40 years, people who suspect they've been harmed by a vaccine have been able to turn to a little-known system called the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – often simply called the vaccine court. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long been a critic of the vaccine court, calling it 'biased' against compensating people, slow and unfair. He has said that he wants to 'revolutionize' or 'fix' this system. I'm a scholar of law, health and medicine. I investigated the history, politics and debates about the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in my book 'Vaccine Court: The Law and Politics of Injury.' Although vaccines are extensively tested and monitored, and are both overwhelmingly safe for the vast majority of people and extremely cost-effective, some people will experience a harmful reaction to a vaccine. The vaccine court establishes a way to figure out who those people are and to provide justice to them. Having studied the vaccine court for 15 years, I agree that it could use some fixing. But changing it dramatically will be difficult and potentially damaging to public health. Deciphering vaccine injuries The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is essentially a process that enables doctors, lawyers, patients, parents and government officials to determine who deserves compensation for a legitimate vaccine injury. It was established in 1986 by an act of Congress to solve a specific social problem: possible vaccine injuries to children from the whole-cell pertussis vaccine. That vaccine, which was discontinued in the U.S. in the 1990s, could cause alarming side effects like prolonged crying and convulsions. Parents sued vaccine manufacturers, and some stopped producing vaccines. Congress was worried that lawsuits would collapse the country's vaccine supply, allowing diseases to make a comeback. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 created the vaccine court process and shielded vaccine manufacturers from these lawsuits. Here's how it works: A person who feels they have experienced a vaccine-related injury files a claim to be heard by a legal official called a special master in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The Health and Human Services secretary is named as the defendant and is represented by Department of Justice attorneys. Doctors who work for HHS evaluate the medical records and make a recommendation about whether they think the vaccine caused the person's medical problem. Some agreed-upon vaccine injuries are listed for automatic compensation, while other outcomes that are scientifically contested go through a hearing to determine if the vaccine caused the problem. Awards come from a trust fund, built up through a 75-cent excise tax on each dose of covered vaccine sold. Petitioners' attorneys who specialize in vaccine injury claims are paid by the trust fund, whether they win or lose. Some updates are needed Much has changed in the decades since Congress wrote the law, but Congress has not enacted updates to keep up. For instance, the law supplies only eight special masters to hear all the cases, but the caseload has risen dramatically as more vaccines have been covered by the law. It set a damages cap of US$250,000 in 1986 but did not account for inflation. The statute of limitations for an injury is three years, but in my research, I found many people file too late and miss their chance. When the law was written, it only covered vaccines recommended for children. In 2023, the program expanded to include vaccines for pregnant women. Vaccines just for adults, like shingles, are not covered. COVID-19 vaccine claims go to another system for emergency countermeasures vaccines that has been widely criticized. These vaccines could be added to the program, as lawyers who bring claims there have advocated. These reform ideas are 'friendly amendments' with bipartisan support. Kennedy has mentioned some of them, too. A complex system is hard to revolutionize Kennedy hasn't publicly stated enough details about his plan for the vaccine court to reveal the changes he intends to make. The first and least disruptive course of action would be to ask Congress to pass the bipartisan reforms noted above. But some of his comments suggest he may seek to dismantle it, not fix it. None of his options are straightforward, however, and consequences are hard to predict. Straight up changing the vaccine court's structure would probably be the most difficult path. It requires Congress to amend the 1986 law that set it up and President Donald Trump to sign the legislation. Passing the bill to dismantle it requires the same process. Either direction involves all the difficulties of getting a contentious bill through Congress. Even the 'friendly amendments' are hard – a 2021 bill to fix the vaccine court was introduced but failed to advance. However, there are several less direct possibilities. Adding autism to the injuries list Kennedy has long supported discredited claims about harms from vaccines, but the vaccine court has been a bulwark against claims that lack mainstream scientific support. For example, the vaccine court held a yearslong court process from 2002 to 2010 and found that autism was not a vaccine injury. The autism trials drew on 50 expert reports, 939 medical articles and 28 experts testifying on the record. The special masters deciding the cases found that none of the causation hypotheses put forward to connect autism and vaccines were reliable as medical or scientific theories. Much of Kennedy's ire is directed at the special masters, who he claims 'prioritize the solvency' of the system 'over their duty to compensate victims.' But the special masters do not work for him. Rather, they are appointed by a majority of the judges in the Court of Federal Claims for four-year terms – and those judges themselves have 15-year terms. Kennedy cannot legally remove any of them in the middle of their service to install new judges who share his views. Given that, he may seek to put conditions like autism on the list of presumed vaccine injuries, in effect overturning the special masters' decisions. Revising the list of recognized injuries to add ones without medical evidence is within Kennedy's powers, but it would still be difficult. It requires a long administrative process with feedback from an advisory committee and the public. Such revisions have historically been controversial, and are usually linked to major scientific reviews of their validity. Public health and medical groups are already mobilized against Kennedy's vaccine policy moves. If he failed to follow legally required procedures while adding new injuries to the list, he could be sued to stop the changes. Targeting vaccine manufacturers Kennedy could also lean on his newly reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to withdraw recommendations for certain vaccines, which would also remove them from eligibility in the vaccine compensation court. Lawsuits against manufacturers could then go straight to regular courts. On Aug. 14, 2025, the Department of Health and Human Services may have taken a step in this direction by announcing the revival of a childhood vaccine safety task force in response to a lawsuit by anti-vaccine activists. Kennedy has also supported legislation that would allow claims currently heard in vaccine court to go to regular courts. These drastic reforms could essentially dismantle the vaccine court. People claiming vaccine injuries could hope to win damages through personal injury lawsuits in the civil justice system instead of vaccine court, perhaps by convincing a jury or getting a settlement. These types of settlements were what prompted the creation of the vaccine court in the first place. But these lawsuits could be hard to win. There is a higher bar for scientific evidence in regular courts than in vaccine court, and plaintiffs would have to sue large corporations rather than file a government claim. Raising the idea of reforming the vaccine court has provoked strong reactions across the many groups with a stake in the program. It is a complex system with multiple constituents, and Kennedy's approaches so far pull in different directions. The push to revolutionize it will test the strength of its complex design, but the vaccine court may yet hold up. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Anna Kirkland, University of Michigan Read more: RFK Jr's shakeup of vaccine advisory committee raises worries about scientific integrity of health recommendations Vaccine misinformation distorts science – a biochemist explains how RFK Jr. and his lawyer's claims threaten public health I'm a physician who has looked at hundreds of studies of vaccine safety, and here's some of what RFK Jr. gets wrong Anna Kirkland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store