
What do we really know about the long-term use of Mounjaro and Ozempic?
The headlines a few weeks ago were as sensational as they were unsettling. ' Ozempic may stop the pill working properly,' this newspaper reported after the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) issued a warning: pill users should double up on contraception while using the jabs and avoid them altogether during pregnancy or breastfeeding. The British Menopause Society also added that women on HRT taking the drugs might fail to absorb progesterone pills, which could increase the risk of womb cancer.
Meanwhile, other reports warned that the injections many are using for weight loss, like Wegovy and Mounjaro, might also carry a hidden risk of kidney cancer.
And this month, the European Medicines Agency cautioned that semaglutide could double the risk of a rare sight-loss condition called non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION).
These headlines would be alarming even if the drugs were rarely used. But these so-called weight-loss jabs have become so popular that even their manufacturers didn't anticipate the demand - and from this week, GPs are allowed to offer Mounjaro to obese individuals who also suffer from a range of other health complications.
As of March 2025, market intelligence company IQVIA estimated that around 1.5 million people in the UK were using weight-loss treatments. With limited NHS availability, roughly 80 per cent of these are purchased privately online and have made the pharma companies that make them some of the most valuable firms in Europe.
But with no real long-term studies, do we really know how safe these drugs are? While they will have been thoroughly tested before hitting the market, have manufacturers really considered how people are using them? What do we really know about their long-term effects? Is this truly a medical breakthrough – or just another chapter in the troubled history of slimming pills?
A crisis in need of solutions
There's no denying that obesity is a public health emergency. Nearly three-quarters of people aged 45 to 74 in the UK are now overweight, up from just over half in 1993. Obesity is linked to conditions such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease, joint problems, infertility, and around 30 types of cancer.
It's estimated to cost the NHS £6.5bn a year. Given this, the search for a safe, effective obesity drug has long been seen as medicine's holy grail. But past attempts have often ended in disaster, either due to limited results or serious safety issues.
The troubled history of slimming drugs
Weight-loss drugs have historically come with significant risks. One of the earliest, 2,4-dinitrophenol, was initially used as an explosive in the First World War. It worked by increasing metabolism, causing the body to burn calories as heat. As hemlines rose in the 1920s, flappers flocked to it, but it turned out that the wrong dose could literally cook users from the inside. Horrific deaths meant the drug was banned in 1938.
Later came amphetamine-based drugs, widely used in the Fifties and Sixties until their links to addiction and cardiovascular issues led to bans. More recently, sibutramine (Reductil) and rimonabant (Acomplia) were withdrawn after being linked to heart attacks, strokes, and psychiatric effects. By the time Acomplia was suspended in 2008, four trial participants had died by suicide.
Enter: GLP-1 agonists. These new-generation drugs, which include semaglutide and tirzepatide, were the first to mimic our own natural appetite-regulating hormones. The first to hit the market was exenatide – a drug to treat type 2 diabetes – in 2005. Ozempic was then approved in 2017 and Mounjaro in 2023. Clinical trials showed unprecedented weight loss of up to 26 per cent of body weight in some cases, on par with bariatric surgery – and seemingly without the deadly side effects of their predecessors.
So, why are these drugs different? 'Most previous drugs targeted the brain, which is where hunger lives,' explains Professor Giles Yeo, a molecular neuroendocrinologist at Cambridge University. 'But that led to serious side effects. These newer drugs are modified, longer-lasting versions of natural hormones – they're designed to go to the right brain regions naturally and for our body to respond to them in the same way they do to our own hormones.'
Miracle or minefield?
Despite their success, the rapid rise in use has triggered concern. Many users now access these jabs through private online clinics with minimal oversight. Some even acquire illegal 'compounded' medications from beauticians. Social media is flooded with user reviews, micro-dosing tips, and 'before-and-after' photos. But this week, a spokesperson for Novo Nordisk, which markets Ozempic and Wegovy, told the Daily Mail that practices like microdosing weren't recommended. 'The approved doses are the only dose strengths that have been studied and are licensed to use,' they warned.
Similarly, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society has warned that without proper supervision, users face risks including dehydration, gallstones, malnutrition, and muscle loss.
What do we know about long-term safety?
Yeo is optimistic: 'Regulatory bodies like the FDA and EMA are very rigorous. These drugs are approved globally, and they wouldn't be if they were deemed unsafe.'
Professor Carel le Roux, a metabolic medicine expert at Ulster University, adds that all approved drugs – not just weight-loss drugs – must be studied for at least 52 weeks. This is because, he says, 'If we haven't seen major issues by a year, we're unlikely to. And this is based on the regulators' experience of tens of thousands of previous studies.'
However, less obvious side effects often appear only after widespread use. Le Roux insists that the new findings that have dominated the headlines in the last few weeks are typical of standard 'post-market surveillance' by which pharma companies and regulators continue to collect data.
'Yes, things can emerge,' he says. 'But we've used this class of drugs for 20 years, mostly in people who were sicker than current users. The data is incredibly reassuring.'
Le Roux also points out that in trials, participants on these medications had fewer serious adverse events than those on placebo. 'That's because obesity and diabetes are so harmful themselves. There comes a point when it's unethical not to license a drug that can make people healthier.'
Untangling the risks
Some risks are still being studied. The kidney cancer alert came from a study of 43,000 people on GLP-1 drugs versus 43,000 controls. There were 83 cases in the treatment group compared to 58 in the control group – a slight absolute increase and not necessarily a clear causal link.
Conversely, other trials show strong kidney protection. The FLOW trial (2019–2023) followed over 3,500 patients and found a 24 per cent lower risk of kidney failure and a 50 per cent reduction in death from kidney disease among semaglutide users. The findings were so conclusive that the trial ended early in order to offer treatment to the placebo group.
Le Roux remains confident: 'We've shown these drugs can reduce heart attacks by up to 25 per cent and cut the risk of developing diabetes in people at risk by 80-90 per cent. Yes, eye issues have emerged, but this particular condition is only seen in people with diabetes, and the risk is around 1 in 10,000.' Yeo also points out that in fact, 'type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in adults'.
So, what about the contraceptive and HRT concerns? Le Roux says vomiting, a known side effect of the drugs, is likely to be to blame rather than the drug blocking absorption per se. 'Anything swallowed will eventually be absorbed – unless it's thrown up.'
To reduce nausea while on these drugs, he advises sticking with lower doses, even if that slows weight loss. If vomiting continues to be a problem, switching to non-oral forms of HRT, such as patches, or using condoms or a coil should eliminate the issue.
Osteoporosis and other risks
Others have expressed concerns about the effect of weight-loss injections on muscles and bones. US singer Avery, who took Ozempic for a year, despite having an eating disorder, recently tearfully revealed she had been diagnosed with osteoporosis. She admitted that she did not get the drug from a doctor. So how common is her experience?
A review published last year showed that between 15 and 40 per cent of weight loss with semaglutide could be lean tissue. Yeo says that it's something users should be aware of. 'Anyone losing weight by any means will always lose lean tissue – which includes water, muscle and bone – alongside fat.' However, he says there is no evidence this far that weight loss injections contribute independently to osteoporosis.'
Yeo says the best way to mitigate bone loss is with exercise, which studies show can preserve muscle and bone density when taken with these drugs.
A protein-rich diet also helps maintain muscle. Reviews have also shown that after weight loss, even though they lost lean tissue, people tended to end up with a higher proportion of lean mass compared to fat and that this muscle could be 'better quality' with stronger muscle fibres. However, in older people with fewer reserves, losing too much weight and muscle, which is harder to rebuild as we age, can be risky.
The problem of dependency
These drugs don't cure obesity – they manage it. Stop the injections and your appetite returns. One study found that patients regained two-thirds of the weight they had lost within a year of stopping treatment. This raises challenging questions. 'One of the most important questions we ask patients now is, 'Are you willing to take this medication for life?'' says Le Roux.
And of course, this comes at a cost, whether it's private consumption (roughly £250 a month) or the NHS, which will have to consider covering lifetime prescriptions. And with the huge sums involved, how do we protect against black-market misuse?
The next generation: hope or hype?
Current drugs target only one or two appetite-regulating gut hormones. However, as Yeo explains, around 20 gut hormones influence satiety. Next-generation treatments may combine more hormones, allowing lower doses and potentially fewer side effects, such as vomiting.
'These could reduce digestive side effects to zero,' says Yeo. Some new generation weight-loss medications are even being designed to protect muscle and bone mass by activating pathways that mimic the effects of exercise.
Yeo says that future, cheap pill forms of the drugs may also prove the secret to lifelong maintenance. With the World Health Organisation announcing in May that it plans to endorse anti-obesity drugs for adult treatment, access may expand globally which could be a medical turning point.
But they're not for everybody...
Few in medicine doubt that GLP-1 drugs mark a breakthrough. But they are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Around 15 per cent of patients don't respond. And there's growing concern that access remains limited to those who can afford private prescriptions, while NHS patients face restrictions. Many people take them without exercising or improving their diet, which is essential to preserve strong muscles and bones in the future.
However, Yeo believes that change is on the way. 'In seven years, Ozempic's patent expires. I predict the cost will fall from £200 to maybe £10 a month. When that happens, the NHS will be able to provide it widely – with proper supervision. These powerful drugs are designed to be used for health reasons, not as a cosmetic tool. They are designed to help people with obesity. If they are taken by skinny people, that's when side effects rocket and the risk vs benefit ratio changes. We need to keep them out of the wrong hands.'
Drugs like semaglutide offer a new weapon in the battle against obesity – a condition that has proven difficult to treat for decades and costs the NHS millions in comorbid conditions, which can range from type 2 diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular disease, osteoarthritis and even depression. But they aren't magic bullets. They come with risks, limitations, and hard decisions about long-term use.
Appropriately used, with medical oversight and realistic expectations, they can be life-changing. But the real test isn't just in the weight lost this year – it's what happens over the next decade.
We should welcome them, but with cautious optimism and our eyes wide open.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Channel 4
33 minutes ago
- Channel 4
Children with debilitating genetic condition denied early life-changing test
Children suffering from Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) – a rare but debilitating genetic condition – are being denied a simple test at birth which could give them the chance of a normal life. Every month in the UK, four babies are born with SMA. If left undiagnosed and untreated, many children with the most common form of SMA, type 1, do not live beyond their second birthday. Yet a test for the condition is not included in the newborn national screening programme – unlike in many other countries, including Ukraine, which introduced the test during the war against Russia. And having that test early on can be vital, as there are now treatments, including a gene therapy, which can halt the disease progression. Professor Giovanni Baranello, Professor of Paediatric Neuromuscular Disorders at Great Ormond Street Hospital, told us that with the treatment, babies will go on to have a normal life: 'They will not develop symptoms, he said. 'So we can basically revert, you know, the progression and natural course of the condition.' SMA causes muscle weakness, breathing and swallowing. Sebastian Stezaly was diagnosed at four months, simply because his mother suspected something was wrong and insisted he was tested, which they had done privately. He began treatment at five months but he had already lost muscle use in his legs and his speech was affected. All for the lack of the newborn test, which could be included in the heel prick test given to all babies at five days old. In 2018 the UK National Screening Committee decided not to recommend to the government that it should add SMA to the national screening programme. Two years ago, they said they would launch an in-service evaluation to gather further evidence. A call for people to take part in the research is underway and the Department of Health says it's working closely with families and campaigners – but it wouldn't say why there has been a delay nor why this evaluation which was once UK-wide, has now been scaled back to just 60 percent of England alone. How new technologies can help improve the nation's health 'Time is muscle' – children trapped in postcode lottery for life-extending drug Progressive MS patients given new hope in world first drug trial


STV News
an hour ago
- STV News
'People could be dying as a result of later cancer diagnoses', minister admits
A Scottish minister has admitted that people might be dying as a result of later cancer diagnoses. Public health minister Jenni Minto made the comments after Public Health Scotland data revealed that cancer waiting times in Scotland are currently the worst on record. The figures show that nearly a third of Scots referred to the NHS with an urgent suspicion of cancer did not begin treatment within the 62-day target. Only 68.9% of those patients referred between January and March started treatment within 62 days, compared to 73.5% the previous quarter and 70.5% in the quarter ending in March 2024. The figure remains well below pre-pandemic levels, with 83.7% of people having been seen within the 62-day target in the quarter ending December 2019. The 62-day standard has not been met since the last quarter of 2012. In the first four months of this year, only one of Scotland's 14 NHS boards reached the target, with 95.8% of patients being seen within 62 days at NHS Lanarkshire. The target for 95% of patients to start treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat has also not been met. Some 94.1% of eligible patients were treated within that timeframe, down from 94.1% the previous quarter and 96.5% in the last quarter of 2019. Minto said the situation is 'not where we should be' and admitted that the Scottish Government could do more, while speaking to STV News. Minto continued: 'Do I think we can do more? Yes, I do. Are we doing it? Yes, we are. Are people losing their lives as a result of later diagnosis? Yes, they may well be. 'It's very disappointing to see the 62-day waiting times for cancer treatment. 'It's something we are investing in to ensure we can reduce them. It's important to recognise there are more people being diagnosed with cancer, but it's still not a [figure] we are at all happy with.' Minto added: 'I accept that the way we treat cancer needs to be looked at very carefully.' She said the SNP Government has been investing more money, introducing rapid cancer diagnostic centres across the country, and increasing diagnostic training. 'What we need to do is focus on ensuring that we can solve the problem and get our treatment and diagnostic times back to the level they should be and that we all want them to be in Scotland,' Minto said. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as doctors say they are ‘excited' by the prospect of more strikes - after already receiving biggest pay rise in public sector and cancelling 1.5million appointments since 2022
Leading doctors have sparked fury by admitting they are 'excited' by the prospect of further strikes despite the risk of patient harm. The British Medical Association is threatening a mass walkout by resident doctors and consultants unless the Government caves in to its pay demands. Failing to do so will undermine efforts to cut waiting lists and Labour's ten-year plan for the NHS, which is due to be published next week, the union added. Resident doctors - previously known as 'junior' doctors - are currently balloting members to secure a mandate for six months of strikes. They have crippled the NHS by taking industrial action 11 times since 2022, forcing health bosses to cancel an estimated 1.5million appointments. Speaking at the BMA annual conference in Liverpool, Dr Ross Nieuwoudt, co-chair of the BMA's resident doctors committee, said: 'In Liverpool, everyone I talk to has already returned their ballot. In places in the peninsula, it maybe a little bit less. 'But in general, and what we're hearing overall, the vast majority, is that people are excited to go again. 'People are still underpaid, and recognising that. People are having other concerns as well, such as the under- and unemployment issues facing them with the training bottlenecks. 'So there's a huge amount of issues, and ultimately, doctors are still very upset and looking for change.' When questioned on his use of the word 'excited', he added: 'Sorry - excited as in energised. Not excited as in looking forward to it. 'They want to push for change. Their cries have fallen on deaf ears.' Resident doctors have already received above inflation pay rises for the past three years, worth an extra 28.9 per cent in total. This includes an inflation-busting rise this year of 5.4 per cent, which is the most generous in the public sector. Dr Nieuwoudt last month admitted their inflation-busting pay rise is 'generous' just days after urging union members to back the strikes in pursuit of an additional 30 per cent. If members support the strikes, it will give them a mandate for walkouts from this July to January next year. Patients Association has said it is 'deeply concerned' about the prospect of further walkouts, warning it causes 'significant distress, pain and worsening health for patients.' Dennis Reed, director of Silver Voices, which campaigns for elderly Britons, said: 'Patients facing long waits for care will not share resident doctors' 'excitement' about the prospect of further disruptive strikes and are instead likely to be filled with despair. 'Such gloating language does not indicate resident doctors are wanting to reach a reasonable settlement. It sounds more like student politics, where they are wanting to strike for striking's sake. 'We would like the BMA and government to settle this dispute so patients can get the care they need when they need it.' Meanwhile, consultants will be asked if they would support strikes in an indicative ballot, due to open next month. Professor Phil Banfield, chair of the BMA Council, said the Government 'need doctors' and would have to 'pay doctors properly'. 'They need doctors. The ten-year plan is not going to be delivered just by artificial intelligence and apps. I sat through a briefing about the ten-year plan last week, and it's, at the moment, it's lacking detail. I'm bemused at the moment as to how it's going to deliver. 'They won't get through their waiting lists unless they pay doctors properly and fairly, and you value them for the expertise they need.' Dr Helen Neary, co-chair of the BMA's consultants committee, said: 'In terms of implementing a ten-year plan, and any of the changes that are needed for that, that cannot be achieved without consultants being part of that conversation and being integral to those changes in services and how care is delivered to patients. 'Without recognising that a consultant is essential in terms of moving those things forwards, I think it's going to be very challenging to get all of the changes that the government would want to be enacted. 'The way that government can make sure that that continues is to meet with us and to develop with us and negotiate a path to pay restoration.' She added it would also be 'challenging' for the government to meet its pledge to cut waiting times for elective care if consultants strike. Consultants and resident doctors say their pay has fallen in real terms despite recent pay rises. The BMA has ramped up security at its annual conference after Jewish doctors complained they felt 'intimidated and unsafe'. Members highlighted that 43 motions submitted for debate during the three-day meeting - one in ten of the total - related to Israel, Palestine or Zionism.