The long shadow of WeightWatchers
In 2018, WeightWatchers tried to reimagine itself. The name was too on the nose, not least at a time when 'diets' had become quietly passé (this was the peak of 'body positivity' after all). And so, Weight Watchers became WW.
The problem – for then chief executive Mindy Grossman, at least – is that not even this ambiguous initialism could conceal WW's provenance. A new logo and a tagline that promised 'Wellness that Works' couldn't save the soul of a company that was founded on weekly weigh-ins. Maybe the letters didn't stand for anything obvious anymore; but everyone knew that the organisation did.
Perhaps this 2018 rebrand was the beginning of the end: on 7 May 2025, WW filed for bankruptcy. The company could no longer keep with the new weight-loss landscape created by fat-loss jabs like Ozempic and Mounjaro.
At its cultural height, WeightWatchers offered more than a plan; it sold a moral structure. Eat less, move more, and face a slew of rewards: a lower number on the scale, the praise (and envy!) of your peers, and the inimitable hard-earned smugness that can only be derived by iron-fisted discipline. Jean Nidetch, who founded the company after being mistaken for being pregnant and became the woman who 'took the 'l' out of 'flab'', intuited that shame could be refashioned into hunger-induced solidarity. WeightWatchers became a church for dieters, a sermon on self-control that came with the warm absolution of shared suffering.
But such rituals are slow and often ineffective, whereas weight-loss drugs like Ozempic work – and with remarkable efficiency. (One study showed that of the 175 people analysed, they lost an average of 12 per cent of their body weight over 28 weeks.) WeightWatchers tried to adapt, launching AI coaches and lifestyle programs, but the brand was outpaced by a changing cultural landscape. The company couldn't find its footing in a society that considered it outmoded; befalling the same fate as the fax machine once the iPhone took over. Or, as former chief executive Sima Sistani told the FT last year, situating WW in an era of weight-loss jabs is akin to Netflix moving from DVDs to streaming.
In March 2023 WW shares hit an all-time low. And, as with many things, it really started with Oprah: she stepped down from the board in February last year after she revealed that she had lost 40lbs by using Ozempic. Within two months, WW's market value stood at $11.6m – diminutive compared to its $6.7bn peak; Novo Nordisk's, the Danish pharmaceutical company behind Ozempic, was $2.6trn, more than the Scandinavian country's economy.
While Ozempic may have helped kill WW, it didn't kill diet culture. It merely re-fashioned it. The WW and Ozempic business model is largely similar: help women lose weight. The difference is that the customer doesn't necessarily care how the desired outcome is achieved anymore. They don't fuss about how they lose ten pounds, only that they do lose ten pounds.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
Embracing body positivity in today's culture might be 'inspirational' but losing weight is aspirational. Because it's not just about weight: it's about status. These drugs, for now, are often expensive and inaccessible. It's believed that more than half a million people in the UK are using weight-loss medications, with the majority paying for it privately. Being slim on Ozempic says, 'I can afford this.' It's a body pharmacologically induced, not gym-sculpted or juice-cleansed. As the adage goes, you're not fat, you're poor.
WeightWatchers was a cultural institution. It shaped generations of women (literally), and stipulated that smaller bodies could unlock better lives. Ozempic takes the mantle of the WeightWatchers ideology and repackages it in a way that seems more in step with the machinations of today's world. Where WeightWatchers told you how to live like a thin person, Ozempic can let you just be one. So long as you pay up.
[See more: Modernity has killed the private life]
Related
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
Apple loses bid to pause app store reform order in Epic Games case
June 4 (Reuters) - Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab has failed to persuade a U.S. appeals court to pause key parts of a federal judge's order requiring the iPhone maker to immediately open its lucrative App Store to more competition. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday rejected Apple's request to put the provisions on hold as the tech giant appeals the judge's order, which came in a long-running antitrust lawsuit brought by 'Fortnite' maker Epic Games. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in April found Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab in contempt of an earlier injunction order she issued in the Epic Games case. The judge on April 30 ordered Apple to end several practices that she said were designed to circumvent the injunction, including a new 27% fee Apple imposed on app developers when its customers complete an app purchase outside the App Store. The court also prohibited Apple from restricting where developers place links to make purchases outside of an app. In its emergency appeal, Apple said the ruling blocked the company from "exercising control over core aspects of its business operations" and forced it to give away free access to its services. Epic Games countered that Apple was trying to continue evading competition and collecting fees that the judge had barred. Apple has faced a "surge of genuine competition" since Gonzalez Rogers issued her April injunction, as developers updated apps with "better payment methods, better deals, and better consumer choice," Epic said. Epic Games sued Apple in 2020 to loosen its control over transactions in applications that use its iOS operating system and how apps are distributed to consumers. Apple mostly won the case, but Gonzalez Rogers in 2021 said Apple must allow developers to more easily steer consumers to potentially cheaper non-Apple payment options. Apple defied that court order to maintain a revenue stream worth billions of dollars, Gonzalez Rogers wrote in April. She also said Apple had misled the court about its efforts to comply with her injunction and referred the company and one of its executives to federal prosecutors for a possible criminal contempt investigation.
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
The People's Republic of iPhone
Photo by In Pictures Ltd./Corbis via Getty Images On Friday 23 May, Donald Trump threatened to impose a 25 per cent tariff on what is arguably the world's most successful consumer product, the iPhone. This would be a historic tax hike on American consumers, because Apple currently sells around 70 million iPhones in the US for about $1,000 each; the US government would ask for $17.5bn in additional taxes on a single product line from a single company. But what Trump wants is actually more extreme: he believes that in order to escape his punitive tariff, Apple might bring production of the iPhone back to America. There are two reasons that this is wishful thinking. The first is that the iPhone is the apex product of globalisation. It would be impossible to make something as complex as a smartphone with the resources of a single country. Apple's supplier list runs to 27 pages of companies, many of which are themselves multinationals with long lists of their own subsidiaries. It is not the product of one country – more like 50. It will never be the case that the iPhone can be described as a purely American product. As Patrick McGee explains in Apple in China, in light of the company's long history of contract manufacturing, the vast sums it has invested in China, the knowledge and skills it has imparted to Chinese workers and the Chinese factories it has developed, it makes more sense to describe it as Chinese. Trump's discomfort with Americans using Chinese phones is not without foundation. What Apple has achieved in China is a spectacular example of industrial strategy. Apple's investment in China for a single year, 2015, was $55bn – greater than the combined research and development spending of every business in the UK. Around the same time, Apple's engineers were working in 1,600 Chinese factories. 'We were unwittingly tooling them up,' a former Apple executive told McGee, 'with… incredible know-how and experience.' It is unclear how other countries can loosen China's grip on technological manufacturing; an American iPhone would cost more than three times the price of current models, according to one analyst. But this is a power that China has been helped to acquire by the Western capitalists who rushed to exploit its people for cheap labour, and who never stopped to consider the long-term implications. A former Apple vice-president told McGee: 'We weren't thinking about geopolitics at all.' For all the Silicon Valley rhetoric about changing the world, Apple does not appear to have understood how successfully it was doing just that. We're reminded to question the information we see on our screens, but the screen itself is also an illusion. The devices of digital modernity are made, we are told, by companies that are American, German, Japanese and Korean. The brightest minds compete in an unending race to make the displays ever more crisp, the computers ever more intelligent. We choose between phones and laptops made by Google, Microsoft, Apple or Amazon, televisions made by Philips or Samsung, games consoles made by Sony or Nintendo. But there is only really one company. It makes products for all of these companies, and hundreds of other businesses around the world. It is called Hon Hai Precision Industry. Hon Hai began in 1974, in a shed in a suburb of Taipei called Tucheng ('dirt city', in Mandarin), in which ten people moulded knobs and dials for televisions from molten plastic. Their boss was Terry Gou, the 24-year-old son of a police officer, and recently released from national service. As personal computers began to proliferate, Gou moved to making components, mostly sockets and connectors; the trading name for the company, Foxconn, refers to connectors. The 'fox' part is simply an animal Gou admires. He also admires Ghengis Khan, and wears a bracelet from a temple dedicated to the Mongol emperor. Gou was instrumental in Apple's return from the brink of defeat. In 1997, Steve Jobs and Jony Ive had created the iMac, which offered to replaced the complicated and boring world of personal computing with an aspirational consumer product that connected easily to the internet. Apple quickly realised why everyone else made beige boxes – making anything else was expensive and difficult – but the company's designers and executives had an additional problem, which was that if they didn't do exactly what Steve Jobs told them to do, he would scream at them and then sack them. Every engineer who doubted the design eventually left and the 'unmanufacturable' iMac was finally manufactured by the Korean company LG. When Apple's exacting demands became too much for LG, it began looking for another company to build its products, and in Taiwan it found Terry Gou. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe In Gou's factory at the end of the 1990s, the roof was made from corrugated metal and the air conditioning was reserved for equipment, not people. Around the building, banners reminded workers of the wisdom of 'Uncle Terry', which included such aphorisms as 'work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow' and 'hungry people have especially clear minds'. Gou, more than anyone else, took advantage of the opportunities offered by the special economic zone that had been established around Shenzhen, in Guangdong province on the east coast of mainland China, in 1980. At the time the zone was created, Shenzhen was a town of around 70,000 people; by 2020, it had a population of 17.5 million. This accelerated growth was the result of the 'Guangdong model', in which local government and private businesses (often led by Taiwanese entrepreneurs such as Gou) collaborated to produce growth. Gou's factory was subsidised and outfitted by the state; the advanced machines on which he began making Apple's designs had been paid for by the Chinese Communist Party. China also provided its people, in vast numbers. Among the sources that McGee has obtained for Apple in China are documents showing that when Apple needed to increase production – in the weeks before a new iPhone went on sale, for example – the Chinese state would be able to secure an additional 800,000 workers for its production lines. This would be done by government-backed companies, which would send buses into rural areas to draw workers from China's 'floating population' of internal migrants. These migrant workers numbered in the hundreds of millions, a larger workforce than that of the European Union. Apple was an exceptionally demanding client, led first by Steve Jobs and then, after his death, by his trusted lieutenant, Tim Cook, whose forensic eye for detail was even more exacting than his predecessor's temper. On his first day as CEO, Cook presided over an operations meeting that lasted for nearly 13 hours. But this was also what China needed: a company that would push its factories to ever greater standards and quantities of production. Jobs, Cook and Gou helped to make China the global factory. By 2010, the executives of Silicon Valley joked that within 20 years, there would be two companies left. Wal-Mart would be the only shop, and everything it sold would be made by Foxconn. As the Guangdong Model brought economic growth to China, Apple discovered that the country was also becoming its most important new market. Despite the role the company had played in China's industrial development, access to this market still came at a price. In 2016, Cook and two of his top executives visited the headquarters of the Chinese Communist Party, where they promised to invest $275bn in the country over the following five years. McGee points out that this sum is more than twice the amount (in real terms) that America had invested through the Marshall Plan in rebuilding Europe after the Second World War. The effects of this investment can be seen on government buildings around the UK. The technology transfer enabled by Apple and others enabled the rise of a new generation of native Chinese companies, such as Huawei. China ceased to be a taker of foreign technology and began pushing its own technology into other states, including Britain. Huawei equipment was installed in the UK's mobile networks, and cameras made by companies such as Hikvision (of which the Chinese state is the largest shareholder, and which human rights organisations have alleged supplies equipment used in the mass surveillance of Uyghur people) appeared at sensitive sites in the UK. Some were worn by our own police officers. Attempts have been made to ban Chinese technology from our infrastructure, but it will be years before it is removed, if it ever is. The trade policy of the Trump administration is an erratic series of pronouncements made via social media, which are almost always delayed and abandoned. And if Trump does persist in battling Apple, he will be abruptly reminded that trillions of dollars of American savings are invested in the company. Xi Jinping has no such concerns. Apple must appease him or lose access to the world's largest group of consumers. As the trade war between America and China grows, then, it must be asked if the world's most influential technology company can avoid picking a side – and to what extent it already has. Apple in China: The Capture of the World's Greatest Company Patrick McGee Simon & Schuster, 448pp, £25 Purchasing a book may earn the NS a commission from who support independent bookshops [See also: The lost futures of Stereolab] Related This article appears in the 04 Jun 2025 issue of the New Statesman, The Housing Trap
Scottish Sun
2 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
I've spent £1000s on cosmetic surgery but there's a procedure I'll never have & won't touch fat jabs says Olivia Attwood
Olivia also opens up about her future on Loose Women after the savage cuts to the ITV daytime favourite ATTA GIRL I've spent £1000s on cosmetic surgery but there's a procedure I'll never have & won't touch fat jabs says Olivia Attwood Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THESE days, it's more shocking to discover a celebrity ISN'T on fat jabs than one who is. But despite unashamedly admitting to her love of a cosmetic trend, Olivia Attwood vows she'll never jump on the Ozempic bandwagon. 7 Olivia Attwood is a self-confessed cosmetic surgery fan - but there's one operation she'll never have Credit: Sofi Adams 7 Olivia also opened up about her sex life with husband Bradley Dack, saying it's an 'as and when' thing Credit: Getty The reason? She wants a BIGGER bum, not a shrinking one. 'I'm always here for the latest fad, but the jabs are actually the one thing that has never tempted me,' reveals Olivia. 'My whole goal is to actually grow an arse in the gym, so I feel like it would be counterproductive. 'I'm constantly chugging protein shakes and doing squats. I'm trying to get more curves, not have less.' Fat jabs are just one of the cosmetic surgery trends that the Love Island legend delves into in the new series of her ITV2 show, Olivia Attwood's The Price of Perfection. And after investigating the surge in popularity of Ozempic and Mounjaro – or GLP-1 receptor agonists, as they are known in the medical community – Olivia also has serious concerns about their safety. 'I think we are still in our infancy of knowing how these drugs behave,' says the 34 year old. 'For some people, they can be very powerful and life-changing, but people are having massive health issues when they are being dished out by non-medics and they are being abused back to back over several years.' Given her penchant for a bigger butt, Olivia admits she has considered a Brazilian butt lift [BBL] – a procedure which sees a surgeon suck fat from the belly, hips, lower back and thighs, then transfer it into the bum to create bigger hips and a smaller waist. BBLs are the fastest growing cosmetic procedure in the UK, with its popularity soaring by 20 per cent year on year. Olivia Attwood shares truth about 'romantic' super yacht date with Chris Hughes & 'gross' act she does with Bradley Dack Frighteningly, however, it has also earned the terrifying reputation of being the deadliest procedure, with some figures estimating one in 3,000 BBLs can result in death. Naturally, Olivia tackles the rising demand for a Kardashian-style booty in her new series, travelling to Turkey to be there in the operating theatre to watch one girl go under the knife in pursuit of her dream derriere. 'A BBL is definitely one of those things I have looked into having,' Olivia admits. 'But for me, the risk doesn't outweigh the result. 'It's really hard to find someone who has had it done once and is super happy. 'It's the procedure that requires the most revision surgeries and most people go back, like, three times. 'Who has the time to lie on your front for eight weeks, three times a year while you are healing? 'For that reason, it doesn't appeal to me.' Olivia has confessed to undergoing a boob job followed by a reduction, chin liposuction and contouring, veneers, lip fillers and Botox. I could easily hit the £100,000 mark if I get my teeth done again Olivia Attwood But while her open nature is one of the reasons she has so many devotees – Olivia has more than 2.5 million followers on Instagram, while her So Wrong It's Right podcast has had more than 7.4 million YouTube views – she confesses she hasn't told her fans everything she's had done. 'I have done things that I haven't explicitly talked about,' she reveals. 'But of course, I've had some help and I'm not ageing backwards.' In fact, Olivia estimates that, at some point, she'll have splashed out six figures on transforming her appearance. 'I could easily hit the £100,000 mark if I get my teeth done again, or when I have to get my boobs redone,' she admits. 'The guidelines are that you have to get your boobs redone every 10 years, so I will have to get them changed at some point. 7 Given her penchant for a bigger bum, Olivia admits she has considered a Brazilian butt lift - but admits the risk doesn't outweigh the result Credit: Getty 7 Olivia says she will always be grateful to the show that launched her career back in 2017 Credit: Rex 'But I want to wait until I have kids before I outlay that money again.' There's another surgery she'd happily consider once she's had babies – a designer vagina. 'If I needed to do that, I would – 100 per cent,' Olivia says. 'We look at mummy makeovers in the new series and the thing I realised is, you never know how your body is going to react to pregnancy. 'Some women see very little changes to their body, while others suffer incontinence and all sorts of health issues. 'So if I felt like something made me unhappy or I had issues, then yeah, of course.' While she hasn't planned when she and her footballer husband of two years, Bradley Dack, 31, will start a family, she admits they have fun practising in the bedroom – when they are actually under the same roof, that is. 'There are times when we struggle for time together, because he was in Sunderland for a whole year and often I'm away filming. So we can't do designated sex nights,' she laughs. 'For us, sex is more of an 'as and when' thing. 'But one of the positive things about spending time apart is that, when you are back together, it feels a lot more exciting. 'I think missing someone is a nice feeling and I still get butterflies when I see him at the airport. 'One way we really keep the spark alive is by texting. 'I always tell people: 'Remember to flirt with your partner.' 'So when I'm texting him, I flirt with him, rather than just asking him if he has walked the dog.' Love Island gave me my big break and changed my life, so I'll always feel very nostalgic about it. Recently, Olivia came under fire after she commented on her Love Island ex, Chris Hughes, and his new girlfriend, Celebrity Big Brother co-star JoJo Siwa. After fans on TikTok asked for her take on the unlikely romance, Liv suggested Chris might have ulterior motives by commenting that JoJo is 'really famous'. Quizzed about her reaction – which led to some of Chris and JoJo's fans slamming her – Liv sighs. 'Basically, when they went official, I got tagged in like 200 TikToks saying they were dying to know what I thought,' she explains. 'The people that follow me know how I say tongue-in-cheek things. 'I just gave them one little line in the spur of the moment. 'Sometimes these things land well and sometimes they don't. 'But the right side of the internet liked it.' She smiles, cheekily, clearly wondering if she will land herself in trouble again. Olivia Attwood's Career History From Monster grid girl and Love Island star to daytime telly panellist and respected documentary maker, Olivia Attwood has made a huge career pivot in recent years... Olivia first started as a Monster grid girl at motorsport events in 2012 when she was 19-years-old, and did it right up until she went into Love Island in 2017. After placing third in the reality show with then-boyfriend Chris Hughes, she starred in their own spin-off series, Chris & Olivia: Crackin' On, in 2018. Later that year, she appeared on Celebs Go Dating and then joined the cast of The Only Way Is Essex in 2019, where she had a number of fiery on-screen rows. In 2020, the reality TV veteran began starring in her own reality series on ITVBe titled Olivia Meets Her Match, which followed her wedding preparations with footballer Bradley Dack. In 2021, the tide started to turn. Olivia made appearances on household shows Lorraine, Tipping Point: Lucky Stars and Loose Women. Then, in 2022, ITV commissioned her for her first ever documentary series. She presented Olivia Attwood: Getting Filthy Rich, which explored women selling sexual content online. In June 2023, ITV commissioned Olivia Marries Her Match and made her a regular guest panellist on Loose Women. Her most recent docu-series, Olivia Attwood: The Price of Perfection, aired in 2024 where she sensitively explored the cosmetic industry. 'The truth is, [their relationship] is not something I think about,' she says. 'I've got a lot going on.' That's quite the understatement. 7 Olivia came under fire after she commented on Love Island ex Chris Hughes and his new girlfriend JoJo Siwa Credit: instagram/@accesshollywood 7 Olivia says she'd be 'open' to hosting Love Island if Maya Jama ever threw in the towel Credit: Rex 7 Olivia Attwood's The Price of Perfection returns on Thursday 12th June As well as the new series of The Price of Perfection, she recently wrapped filming the next run of Olivia Attwood's Bad Boyfriends and is about to start shooting a fourth round of her other hit show, Getting Filthy Rich. On top of that, she manages to squeeze in her podcast, a radio show with pal Pete Wicks and being a Loose Women panellist. And despite the recent cuts to the ITV daytime favourite, Olivia confirms that her place on the panel is safe. 'I'm definitely staying on Loose,' she says. 'I literally adore that show and the women on it. 'But there are a lot of people who will be impacted [by the changes] behind the camera.' With a new series of Love Island kicking off this week, Olivia says she will always be grateful to the show that launched her career back in 2017. 'Love Island gave me my big break and changed my life, so I'll always feel very nostalgic about it,' she insists. And with rumours swirling that Maya Jama might trade in her keys to the villa after this upcoming series, might Olivia fancy slipping into her stilettos and hosting the nation's favourite dating show? 'I think Maya's fantastic for the show and I don't think she's going anywhere,' she says. 'But I'll be completely honest – I'd definitely be open to it if Maya didn't want to do it anymore. So, if the powers that be asked me to have that conversation, of course, I would be ALL ears.'
