Study links GLP-1 drugs to bigger jump in women's employment than a degree(finance.yahoo.com) |
Study links GLP-1 drugs to bigger jump in women's employment than a degree(finance.yahoo.com) |
Commenter A (esp. often a woman, though of any age): I lost a lot of weight and people treat me radically better. I did not change my behavior in a way that explains this; it seems like stigma / prejudice.
Commenter B: I have never met you but it is probably the case that stigma is not relevant and in fact you did somehow become more confident or otherwise start behaving differently in ways that mean your prior and current experiences of the world were somehow deserved.
Which is kind of wild!
Not when I’m clearly bald though
People treat you better when you look better it’s sad but true
I literally have a weight number where if I am north of the number, I can tell people treat me differently and not as nice and if I am south of that number, people treat me a lot nicer (gasp, Women even hit on me). People are fulling themselves if they think their weight does not matter to the world around them.
(This is me say good job, and congrats on your new found health :) )
Society is better off with more intelligence, but also with more beauty! As we automate intelligence, the selection pressure on good looks will only increase.
Your question elides what “favoring” is in this context.
Outside of a few particular jobs, intelligence better predicts work performance, especially for knowledge work. The point of calling out the stigma of obesity is that it unfairly maligns people who are otherwise capable of contributing to a company.
1. Halo effect - people treat you better cause you're hot.
2. Confidence effect - you do things you wouldnt have because you now have energy, confidence, and freed up mental capacity from lower food noise.
You could call it a stigma or prejudice, but until calliagnosia[0] becomes a reality, it is what it is.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liking_What_You_See:_A_Documen...
(I don't know yet if anyone has determined whether this is a direct effect of GLP-1R agonism; or whether e.g. metabolic disorder has auto-immune aspects, and GLP-1R agonism effectively treats metabolic disorder; or whether it's just that e.g. sugar and other simple carbs are directly pro-auto-immune, and GLP-1R agonism breaks the addictive salience of sugars/simple carbs in such a way that even if you're eating the same amount, you're putting less of those in your body. Regardless of the mechanism, there does seem to be a consensus on the overall anti-auto-immune effect itself.)
The anti-auto-immune effects of GLP-1RAs show up visibly, e.g. on the face, entirely separately from the effects of weight loss (because this effect still occurs even when the dose of GLP-1RAs is too low to provoke weight loss), in the form of decreased puffiness, oiliness, acne, chapped lips, etc. It causes a bunch of small changes that make someone look like they're "taking better care of themselves" (even though they may have been taking assiduous care of themselves before, but didn't look it, for autoimmune reasons.) People definitely judge others on how "healthy" they look, so this could definitely help someone to get a job.
But the anti-auto-immune effects of GLP-1RAs also show up in entirely unconscious behavioral changes — not in anything cognitive, like "confidence", but rather due to GLP-1RAs being at least partly effective in treating chronic, sometimes-subclinical, usually-not-well-managed autoimmune pain disorders (think fibromyalgia) and autoimmune energy disorders (think ME-CFS.) Being less achey and having more energy makes people behave differently — whether that be on the macro level in subconscious decision-making (think of how people make different choices when overtired without being aware of it — people with chronic energy disorders are "overtired" 100% of the time!), or on the micro level, in terms of how e.g. speech is performed (people have reported becoming less "croaky", and their usable vocal range expanding), how nonverbal communication is performed (it's easier and "cheaper" to move your face and head and body, so you do), etc.
And note how, for these behavioral changes, some of these might be obvious to the person going through the changes (like your voice changing); but others are things you may not be aware has changed.
For facial expressions in particular, people learn to use their face in certain expressive ways when they're young, and then often don't notice when their face stops "responding" fully/correctly/in the way they'd anticipate to their brain's commands to execute these expressions. As far as you're concerned, you're doing what you always did; it's just that, at some point, you developed an autoimmune condition that attacked (or plugged up with waste) some nerves or muscles or tissues or whatever, that made those higher-level signals from your motor cortex stop translating perfectly to actually initiating the actions you expected. Most people don't periodically test their facial expressions in a mirror, so you only get info about the breakdown of these capabilities reflected in other people's reactions toward you changing. And, likewise, if these capabilities were to be suddenly restored, you'd only find out through others' reactions to you as well!
One key point:
> Nor do I find evidence of upward job mobility among incumbent workers. Already-employed women do not increase hours, income per household member, or job-to-job moves. If anything, employer changes decline, possibly due to a desire to retain access to health insurance that covers these drugs. These null effects help distinguish a new-match channel from a general productivity or well-being channel
This complicates the idea that it’s just people treating lighter people better. It could well be that a lot of people who take GLP-1s are obese enough where it affects their ability to go out in the world and do stuff, and losing the weight enables people to work.
I'm not about to dive into the literature, but I kinda just assumed that losing weight naturally would help all those things.
Unfairness found against one segment is not negated by studying only one segment, and “but” is a load-bearing word representing your entire, one-word, claim above. Please explain in more words what argument you’re supporting with these two observations.
GLP-1 drugs seem to provide a (relatively) painless way to control the weight effect; the corresponding treatment for control of height [2] is much more painful, risky, and expensive.
-------------------
[1] https://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/standing
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/17/us/height-surgery-limb-le...
I did have a weird experience right before the pandemic where the CTO of our company, who had never met me in person before but we'd been on tons of Zoom calls, got visibly upset and even said he'd been tricked, because I was older than he thought. That wasn't a good sign for my future in the slice of the company. The irony here is that he was near retirement age and has since retired. Still, my professional headshot, which was at least a decade old, appears to have set expectations. Guess even on a video call people sometimes see what they expect to see and only during an in-person meeting do they have to confront reality.
Maybe a makeover should be suggested more often in job search advice? Work on your hair and diet for a few months before you jump ship and you could have better luck.
This is genuine question, I've started using them and they're one of the best things I've ever paid for.
You get good food, at calculated sizes/calories/etc etc, you don't have to do shopping, cooking, cleaning, etc.
It is insanely convenient and you can manage your weight easily without even any exercises (but they're still recommended tho)
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/21/well/eat/ozempic-food-noi...
If you are badly groomed as a man, you tend to be perceived as careless.
In my experience if you are obese, people think you lack will power and discipline.
Changing how people view you for the better always has an influence on your personal success.
> have noticeable accent
The body has no mechanism to break down fat cells like it can muscle cells. So every fat cell they had before taking the GLP-1 will still be there after years of taking GLP-1. Like deflated balloons, just primed to absorb any extra calories.
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w35387/w353...
An tangential part of the paper is partnered men:
Among baseline partnered men (which is where partnership dissolution is
well-defined), I find a 6.8pp increase in men leaving their baseline partners
(s.e. 2.9), which rises to 12.1pp after 1.5+ years (s.e. 6.1). Unlike women,
partnered men leave existing relationships with weight loss.Someone who is able to getting and sustaining a prescription for GLP-1 is likely in a higher income bracket than one who does not.
40 years ago educated women were rare, even in the western world. Now not being obese is becoming increasingly rare.
I for one am glad for all the people now finding better employment opportunities, better health, and (anecdotally) better outlooks on life thanks to their weight loss. Awesome throughout.
> 40 years ago educated women were rare, even in the western world.
The world is made of HR departments and executive suites chock full of people who insist they are somehow special and immune to all the things we know about how fallible humans are at making decisions.
It's like how nearly everyone believes themselves to be an "Above average" driver, including the morons who get into an accident every single year because they text and drive constantly.
I was gonna say "this is decades old", it's over a century old.
In my experience, improving appearance is already one of the top suggestions for job applicants. We're attuned the other way too, showing up to work in a nice outfit tends to be met with "got an interview today?"
Ageism and being attractive are both real things, like it or not... =/
The study itself is certainly not conclusive. The control group were women who wanted to take GLP-1, but didn't. That can indicate all kinds of status/class differences. The study also seems to have been a fishing expedition, and is based on self-reports, so it's tentative at best. I wouldn't recommend taking GLP-1 for a job interview based on this article.
I'm not sure that's true. I think there's a baseline issue here. Regardless, even if it netted out to zero, you'd end up with a different order of who gets hired when, so for any individual it'd still make sense to try to improve your looks.
i'm well aware of the stereotype but 100% of the time, seen it as a scrubby white guy in a hoodie.
Pretty privilege
Part of this is probably unconscious, but another part is probably explicit assumptions about the person's self-discipline, e.g. the fit guy must get up at 6am every morning and go for a run, and the obese guy probably sleeps in, eats trash, etc.
More like stereotypes.
For some reason I took both GLP-1 and Ritalin everyday, having moderate exercises despite throwups, only see myself gaining weight rather than losing. I have no idea why both drugs that claims to lose weight only to do the exact opposite, and perhaps I'm the kind of people who can only get fat and not losing it despite some joint efforts.
Perhaps it is not enough and I have to go full aerobatic and ketone mode. Money money money.
Taller people--an area where men have a very distinct advantage--make more money and have an easier go of things.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X2...
"Based on the meta-analysis, we found evidence that the height premium varied by context: the height premium was smaller in the U.S. and Australia, and larger in Latin America and Asia. Within geographies, there appeared to be a larger height premium for men than for women."
real loosely, something like 1/3, 40% are in these blue collar fields, and even in those fields there are enough sales and similar roles that prefer better appearances.
Could it be that _you_ are simply be not as attracted to men as you are to women?
Here's a random Internet troll's theory (mine): there's a kernel of truth to the whole "patriarchy" thing. It's just that most men aren't part of it.
Hold that pitchfork for just a moment! What I meant was: the entire economy is controlled by a very small number of people. Most of them are men, and they have very particular preferences. Assuming the majority of them are straight, it would make sense that they prefer women they see as pretty, and don't care much about men. If anything, a good looking man might be a competitor.
I don't think this idea is completely nuts. Think of the few times in history when a woman had real power. For example, Catherine the Great. Who was suddenly promoted to positions of influence? Sexy men, her "favorites" (yes, that's an actual term).
This feels very fallacious. Attractiveness can be important but not the only factor that matters.
Height is a way that men are judged as attractive. Likewise, tall men tend to do better than short men on income and promotions.
All these things help.
FYI this is the norm for fully remote positions, at least in my experience
For example, even looking solely at the men at my company, our sales reps, marketing lead, and CEO are all more conventionally attractive than our hardware engineers, finance manager, and CTO. And I would say women tend to be at least slightly more likely to wind up in the former positions than the latter (of course we’re speaking in generalities here)
I lost 90 pounds and now the heels of my feet are as soft and supple as a baby's bottom.
Being overweight causes all sorts of weird side effects.
It's all hyperpalatable foods and the effects of extra adipose tissue are know to be bad for pretty much every health metric under the sun.
A real GLP-1 slows down digestion so much that if you try to overeat you'll regret it. You'll still be uncomfortably full and ready to throw up on day 2 after that big meal.
Still, with all the things I've tried I still gained weight. And I have been noticably getting harder to sleep at night because the hungry feelings comes back. Maybe it is the oral Rybelsus waning off idk
Have you reduced your calorie consumption?
* uniform dose-response: easy to increase effect by changing dose
* reversibility: automatic reversion to pre-intervention in a short-term is gold standard - allows for regret escape
* low-cost
GLP-1 drugs have these properties which I like. I'm surprised to hear that someone would prefer the alternative, but I must imagine that cost and the dosing structure (sub-q injection is annoying) must dominate decision making here.
Because muscle is about 3x as expensive to maintain as fat, unless you are on some major strength training to maintain, muscle is the very first thing that your body gets rid of when losing weight.
So now you are off the GLP-1. But you also have to eat fewer calories to maintain a calorie deficit because you no longer have all that calorie burning muscle.
* And depending on when you start your GLP-1 journey, men when they hit 40 naturally lose between 5% and 8% of their total muscle mass a year (women, probably earlier). In addition to the muscle loss due to weight loss.
* And it takes approximately 3 times longer in your 50s to create a pound of muscle that it does in your 20s.
* And you can't train like you did in your 20s or you will hurt yourself.
* And as you age, your body can't absorb the protein it needs to build muscle as efficiently as it did when you are young. So you need to eat even more food to compensate.
Ok. This is now more of a rant about getting older than it is about GLP-1s.
I think your numbers might be per decade, not per year?
The health problems that GLPs produce help people avoid are way more costly than the drugs will ever be. Especially now that the market is so competitive and will only get moreso.
Importantly, this is different from "GLP-1 meds have been shown not to produce a net positive benefit-to-risk ratio"
Anyway nearly all of the side effects for these drugs are just discomfort. Not even really obvious they should be called "risks." Meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans who are not already diabetic or have HTN will soon, and it would be quite a surprise to learn these drugs don't have protective effect.
I’m just really not what you’d think of as a model candidate for them, so I’m not quite ready to commit to my first and only, not exactly free, rest of my life pharmaceutical dependence.
That may not seem perfectly rational to some… but ya’know… I’m the one who has to live with my brain.
Medication can be a slippery slope into side effects and rotating dosages/medicines. Especially for behavioral medicines.