Wegovy drug not miracle obesity cure, warns weight-loss doctor
Photo:
THOM LEACH / SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRA / TLE / Science Photo Library via AFP
A weight-loss doctor is warning patients not to rely on Wegovy as a cure for obesity, saying the newly available medication could be more harmful than helpful.
Waikato bariatric surgeon Dr Rowan French said Wegovy was a welcome tool in the battle against obesity, but it needed to be used in conjunction with psychological, exercise and nutritional support.
As with bariatric surgery, he recommended patients address the reasons they overate and the types of food they ate to avoid regaining any weight lost.
"People need to know that it's likely, particularly for someone who's living with severe obesity... their problem is a lifelong one and, while it can be controlled, there's a good chance they will never fully be cured of that.
"Without substantial change in their lifestyle - this is not just the foods they eat, it's the reasons they eat as well - without external help to understand their drivers to eat and nutritional help to understand the sorts of foods that they should be eating, particularly in the first 18-24 months, then the medications could prove more harmful than good.
"Particularly by causing some initial weight loss followed by substantial weight regain."
Wegovy contains semaglutide, an obesity medication that's a synthetic form of a hormone called GLP-1, which is made in the small intestine.
Ozempic is also semaglutide and works in the same way, but is licenced for type 2 diabetes rather than obesity.
GLP-1 plays several roles in the body, including triggering insulin release from the pancreas, and affecting areas of the brain that control hunger and satiety (feeling full).
Gastric bypass surgery causes amplified release of GLP-1 (and other hormones) from the small bowel in response to meals, which switches off appetite.
The release is cyclical, which means the hormone levels go up and down through the course of the day in response to eating, and goes directly into the gut circulation.
By contrast, Wegovy is injected under the skin in a large weekly dose into the systemic circulation.
"Here's the problem," French said. "We already know there is tachyphylaxis - the medical term for tolerance - that occurs with bariatric surgery as early as 18-24 months after surgery - there is a slowly waning effect.
"We can be almost certain that the injection of synthetic GLP-1 given in large bolus will cause tolerance earlier and more profoundly than bariatric surgery.
"In other words, as time goes on, the patient will get less and less benefit from the medication, so any suggestion some people should stay on it for life is unlikely to be sensible or beneficial."
French said that was where psychological and nutritional support, as well as exercise to avoid muscle mass loss, was vital, but "infrequently available".
"We know that weight regain is common several years after bariatric surgery, particularly if patients are not engaged in multidisciplinary follow-up.
"We know that, when semaglutide is stopped, in most cases, weight is regained, but we can also predict, if a patient stays on it, they will develop tolerance, because this occurs with bariatric surgery, albeit later in the piece."
French said people with a weight problem almost certainly had a lifelong disease.
"We are generally born with a likely predicted adult weight, which - in large part - is decided by our genetics... things that have happened to us in early life [trauma] and, to a certain extent, the environment.
"We have far less control over our long-term weight than most people think we do."
He said long-term weight control was subconscious - it happened in the "primitive brain".
"We can temporarily go on diets. We can temporarily override our primitive brain, but almost always this innate set-point... that we are born with dictates what our adult weight is going to be and it will drag us back up to that adult weight, despite going on diets."
Waikato bariatric surgeon Rowan French.
Photo:
Supplied
The aim was to control obesity, not cure it, French said.
"One of the things we see that raises that set-point is what we call 'cyclical dieting'."
Also known as 'yo-yo dieting', this is when a person loses weight on a diet, but regains it after the diet ends.
"Our primitive brain interprets that as starvation and it starts to fight back, and most people will regain the weight quite quickly.
"They will go back to a weight that was slightly higher and it's nature's way of putting more in the bank in case it happens again."
French said, when yo-yo dieting elevated a person's set-point to a new, higher level, the brain in turn defends that weight.
"So every time someone goes on a yo-yo diet and gains more, their weight set-point rises, so by the time we see people with severe problems who need treatment such as bariatric surgery, they might have done 10-12 diets.
"Each time their set-point has risen and it might have gone up 20, 25, 30, 35kg over a number of years."
French, who works in public and private, is speaking out, because he's concerned Wegovy has been sensationalised by celebrities as a wonder-drug.
While he said the new medications were the best New Zealand had ever had for weight loss, he stressed the need to address the causes of obesity.
One factor, he said, was the type of food people ate.
French said ultra-processed food (UPF) caused a spike in obesity rates in the mid-1980s and what he refers to as "pandemic obesity" in the western world.
"Essentially, you've got now a dominant food that makes up about 50-60 percent of what we eat, which is purely manufactured and designed to make us eat as much as possible.
"We know from the very robust data that it causes metabolic disease, it causes depression, it causes dementia, it causes cancer."
UPFs included most food that wasn't a whole food.
"Whole food being what your grandma would recognise as food," he said. "Very simply, if it's wrapped in plastic and it's got one ingredient that you wouldn't find in a home kitchen, that's an ultra-processed food."
The food was attractive because it was convenient, quick to prepare and easy to cook, and often less expensive.
French said it was often soft and easy to chew, low in fibre and didn't activate the hormone needed to make a person feel full, so people ate more.
"It's the combination of salt, fat and sugar that's always engineered to make it the most moorish it can possibly be."
French, who's private work is through Tailor Clinics in Hamilton, said his patients learn about eating whole foods at least 95 percent of the time.
Hashtags

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

RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Outdated alcohol guidelines understate health risks, ministry documents reveal
HNZ considered updating the safe drinking guidelines was crucial. Photo: RNZ New Zealand's official low-risk drinking guidelines are outdated and "understate the health risks" of alcohol, according to Health New Zealand (HNZ) documents. Efforts to update the guidelines were halted after alcohol lobbyists complained to a Ministry of Health general manager Ross Bell. Bell, who works within the ministry's Public Health Agency, says he intervened to clear up confusion about whether HNZ or the Ministry of Health (MOH) should manage the guidelines. He said the MOH would manage them now but that work was on hold while it considered its priorities. Documents released to RNZ under the Official Information Act show why HNZ considered updating the safe drinking guidelines was crucial and that it saw "scrutiny from the alcohol industry" as a risk factor in the process. New Zealand's drinking guidelines say that to stay low-risk, men should have no more than 15 drinks per week and women ten. The maximum number of drinks recommended per week to stay low-risk (for men and women) is set at two in Canada, ten in Australia and 14 in the UK. Canada, Australia and the UK all significantly reduced their safe drinking guidelines in recent years as evidence emerged about the health risks of alcohol, which is linked to seven types of cancer. Photo: RNZ A November 2024 memo from HNZ alcohol harm prevention manager Tom Devine said New Zealand's guidelines, written in 2011, were now out of date. "The evidence around alcohol and its risks to health has evolved since then and other countries like ours, such as the United Kingdom (in 2016), Australia (in 2020), and Canada (in 2023), have updated their Alcohol & Health Advice, resulting in much lower recommended drinking limits," Devine wrote. "The current advice is complex (and) out of step with other jurisdictions." He said the current guidelines also did not meet the needs of pregnant and breast-feeding women and young people. "A review and update are necessary to ensure the advice is clear, inclusive and based on the most up-to-date evidence." Another HNZ document, written in January 2024, said "The current advice does not reflect the latest scientific evidence meaning that it understates the health risks from alcohol." The documents show HNZ commissioned Massey University to work on the first phase of a review in February 2024 - at a cost of about $130,000 - but later that year Ross Bell from the Ministry of Health intervened. Emails obtained by RNZ show a lobbyist with the Brewer's Association emailed Bell in October 2024 asking why a HNZ website was reporting that the drinking guidelines were under review. He emailed again a month later complaining that references to the review were still on the website, run by HNZ, and also took issue with the fact the site linked to Canadian drinking guidelines. Bell emailed HNZ in December 2024: "All work on this project will now pause. You will update relevant Health NZ websites to remove references to the review and also to other jurisdictions' guidelines (including the Canadian one)." Bell has declined requests for an interview with RNZ, but in a previous statement said material was removed from the website to avoid confusion, as the drinking guidelines were now led by the Ministry of Health not Health New Zealand, which runs the website. He said that was an internal decision by MOH and that a review of the drinking guidelines was now on hold while the ministry considered its priorities. But the documents released to RNZ show HNZ believe it is crucial to update the guidance. A memo from HNZ alcohol harm prevention manager Tom Devine said health professionals relied on accurate guidelines, which were "foundational" for screening, interventions and referral for treatment. "This is where health professionals ask patients about their alcohol consumption using the advice as a baseline to assess risk, which informs the need for brief interventions or referral for counselling or treatment." Devine's memo said one of the risks in reviewing the guidelines was "scrutiny from the alcohol industry" and his mitigation strategy included "a strategic communications plan to articulate the evidence base and reasoning". Associate Professor Andy Towers, the co-director of the Mental Health & Addiction Programme at Massey University, worked on the initial stages of the review for HNZ. He said the current guidelines understated the risk. "There's more and more evidence now, especially with longitudinal health data, to show that even low levels of alcohol use over a long time can result in some significant alcohol related harms." He said sticking with the 2011 guidelines could lull drinkers into a false sense of security. "For us to set low risk advice thresholds that are quite high, much higher than other countries, means that we will continue to have serious alcohol related harms occurring across the country, in communities, and that will flow through into hospitals." Cancer Society evidence and insights lead Emma Shields said a review of the drinking guidelines was needed to bring them into line with the latest evidence and international guidance. She said alcohol caused seven different types of cancer including breast, bowel and oesophageal. "When it comes to cancer risk, there is no 'safe' level of alcohol use, and even small amounts of alcohol increase the risk of cancer."


NZ Herald
20 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Wellington man Finlay Thompson on weight loss drug Wegovy after Medsafe approval
A Wellington man is stoked to finally get his hands back on the weight loss drug he said changed his life. Wegovy was approved for weight loss in March 2025 with a doctor's prescription. The drug became available in pharmacies at the start of this month. The

RNZ News
21 hours ago
- RNZ News
Mediawatch: Pandemic probe media focus flipped to politicians
Representatives of pressure group Voice of Freedom addressing the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 response, last Thursday. Photo: Royal Commission livestream "It's the big one. The inquiry into the Covid response kicks off this morning. It looks at lockdowns. It looks at all of the things you hated most," Ryan Bridge told viewers of NZME's streaming show Herald Now last Monday morning . But the public hearings which ran all week turned out not to be such a 'big one' for the media. "I saw the Covid inquiry in the news this morning and I just thought: how long does this have to go on for?" an exasperated Lara Greaves - an associate professor in politics - told Bridge later in the same show. She's not the only one who feels that way. But the hearings were barely in the news after they got under way on Monday. On Tuesday the inquiry was well down the running order in morning and evening news shows, long after coverage of the mushroom poisoning trial in Australia. On Wednesday the possibility of moa being regenerated with the backing of Sir Peter Jackson was a bigger story for most outlets. There was a little more coverage on Thursday when anti-vaccine and anti-lockdown groups appeared, ahead of anti-conspiracy theory group FACT and immunologist Professor Graeme LeGros later on. But by the time they wrapped up on Friday the hearings had virtually vanished from bulletins. And what was said over the five days generated less coverage than questions about whether politicians would appear at hearings in future. As for "the things you hated most" - people hated different things. Asthmatic Annie Collins told the inquiry on the first day she thought lockdowns worked and saved lives, and vaccine misinformation online was the real problem. "I think that was a major flaw in our system. All those social media streams should have been blocked. They were disgusting and they were basically lies," she said. Shutting down social media channels was out of scope for this inquiry, but the chairman Grant Illingworth KC told Ryan Bridge on Monday the big decisions made at the time were certainly not. Employment relations and safety manager Paul Jarvie and Heart of the City chief executive Viv Beck. Photo: Screengrab / Covid 19 Inquiry When the Herald Now host pressed the chairman about getting the big political decision-makers in front of the inquiry he said they would be invited to come and give evidence at a second set of hearings next month. When asked if former PM Jacinda Ardern would be one of them, Illingworth replied: "There are issues in relation to our powers when people are out of the country. If she's in the country, we will consider her position." He would not reveal details of specific communications, but he did say "those things are being worked through" and that "we will be fair, open and transparent at the appropriate time." That response was misinterpreted by many in the media as meaning Jacinda Ardern had been asked to attend - and either had not yet responded or that the chair would not say if she had or not. RNZ amended its reporting to make it clear the Commission said no decision had yet been made about who would appear at the August hearings. But Ryan Bridge continued to press for Ardern's appearance on Herald Now and Newstalk ZB. David Seymour - appearing as the acting PM - told Ryan Bridge the former PM should front up to answer questions about "the most significant political and economic event of this century so far." But Seymour was also at pains to point out that the inquiry is independent, and would make its own decision. That was the reason Labour leader Chris Hipkins - health minister during the period covered by the inquiry - gave on Morning Report the next day for not giving a view on Ardern's attendance. Hipkins also dodged a question about whether he'd discussed the issue with Jacinda Ardern herself. On Herald Now on Tuesday, Chris Hipkins confirmed he was cooperating with the inquiry, but equivocated on whether he himself would appear before it in August. He also made it clear he really didn't fancy what he thought had become a political process. "The terms of reference specifically exclude decisions made when New Zealand First were part of the government. So I think that the terms of reference have been deliberately constructed to achieve a particular outcome, particularly around providing a platform for those who have conspiracy theorists' views," he said. NZ First demanded the inquiry when forming the coalition government in 2023. The party even invoked 'agree to disagree' provisions in that agreement when National persisted with the first Royal Commission the Labour government had already launched. The second phase opened this week with new commissioners and expanded terms of reference, which meant that fringe voices opposed to the vaccine mandates, and in some cases the vaccine itself, would be heard this time and heard but not cross examined. "It seems to have been specifically written into the terms of reference that they get maximum airtime," Hipkins told Herald Now , adding that some of those given a platform had inspired the occupation of Parliament in 2022, where platforms for gallows were built - including one with his own name on it. One of the groups that prompted the occupation was the anti-vaccine, anti-lockdown group Voices for Freedom. The group's Facebook page was taken offline in 2021 for what the platform said was "misinformation that could cause physical harm." "You seriously expect the people of New Zealand to accept that deaths being reported internationally (in 2020) were not genuinely from Covid?" Grant Illingworth KC asked them on Thursday. "We're not disputing that there were deaths. We're simply saying that it gets very complex, especially when people are being funded in order to tick a box to say that a death was caused by Covid," VFF co-founder Claire Deeks replied. Voices for Freedom is also promoting a Face the Music campaign pressing the inquiry's commissioners to summon Jacinda Ardern and others and "hold them accountable for their COVID abuse." Their online petition depicts Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Sir Ashley Bloomfield all shoulder-to-shoulder in a courtroom dock. It's not exactly in tune with the evidence-gathering and non-adversarial approach of this Royal Commission's mandate. But others in the media weighed in behind the idea. "It is actually bizarre that we are having a Covid inquiry without Dame Jacinda's participation. She owes it to Kiwis to front up," Stuff's 'good news' correspondent Patrick Gower declared on Wednesday. That was triggered by Sir Ian Taylor's open letter to Jacinda Ardern last weekend - also published by Stuff - accusing Ardern of turning her back on the nation of five million for "a waka for one." But the same day The Post had reported a spokesperson for Dame Jacinda Ardern said she would provide evidence to the Covid-19 inquiry if asked - and "discussions were ongoing about the best way for it to occur." "Fact: Ardern has agreed to give evidence to phase two of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Government's response to Covid-19," The Herald's Fran O'Sullivan stated bluntly this weekend. "There is room to examine all of this dispassionately - not try to (figuratively) hang her again as the more deranged attempted when they wheeled out their noose on Parliament's grounds." For all the urging in the media, the story has actually been the same since March when the inquiry issued a minute , making it clear it could not take a legalistic or adversarial approach. "The commissioners expect that individuals will be prepared to attend interviews with them and or officers of the inquiry on a voluntary basis," the minute stated, regarding interviews with decision makers. "The interviews may be conducted online or in person, recorded and may be transcribed for the public record." In the end opinions about a point that was mostly moot overshadowed the coverage of what the commissioners were actually told in five days of public, livestreamed hearings. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.