I’m sure you remember when you were a kid that someone in your family would make a comment about eating your dinner as served to you on your dinner plate. There were the usual, “What about the starving kids in Europe?” comments that were popular after WWII for a few years. That would get complemented in the sixties by the wise-ass kids at the table asking with tongue-in-cheek, “Yeah, but what’s about the youth-in-Asia (euthanasia)?” Then, the sweeter mom’s would say that you wanted to be a member of the Clean Plate Club, didn’t you? That was the grabber, since we all wanted to be a member of that club and were waiting to get our membership cards in the mail. The Clean Plate Club, of course, refers to a common childhood practice where children are encouraged or required to finish all the food on their plates before leaving the table. Parents and caregivers often use this approach with the intention of preventing food waste, ensuring adequate nutrition, or teaching children not to be wasteful. While the motivation behind the Clean Plate Club is understandable, many nutritionists and child development experts now question this approach. Research suggests that requiring children to clean their plates can interfere with their natural hunger and satiety cues, potentially leading to overeating habits that persist into adulthood (who knew?). Children are generally born with an innate ability to self-regulate their food intake, eating when hungry and stopping when full…well, at least some children. The potential concerns with the Clean Plate Club include teaching children to ignore their body’s fullness signals, creating negative associations with mealtime, potentially contributing to emotional eating patterns, using food as a reward or punishment system, and ending up with fat kids…like I was. Many child nutrition experts now recommend allowing children to determine their own portion sizes (within reason) and respecting when they say they’re full, while still maintaining structure around mealtimes and offering nutritious options.
Based on the latest data from the CDC and other health organizations, the key obesity statistics for America are significant. Adult obesity prevalence was 40.3% between August 2021-August 2023 , with 39.3% for men and 41.4% for women . This represents a slight decline from the previous period (2017-2020) when it was 41.9%. Severe obesity (BMI 0f 40 or above) affects 9.4% of adults, with significant gender differences: 6.7% of men versus 12.1% of women. Childhood obesity (ages 2-19) rose from 13.9% in 1999-2000 to 19.7% in 2017-2020 , with rates increasing by age group. While the recent data shows some stabilization, between 2018 and 2023, 28 states experienced statistically significant increases in adult obesity rates. Projections suggest that by 2030, nearly half of all U.S. adults will be obese, including nearly 1 in 4 who will have severe obesity. Enter GLP-1 drugs, discovered through a fascinating journey spanning several decades, involving multiple scientific breakthroughs and different research approaches. In the 1960s and 70s, scientists explored glucagon. Between 1980 and 1983, researchers successfully mapped the amino acid sequence and gene responsible for proglucagon. The key breakthrough came when the Habener Lab utilized recombinant DNA technology to elucidate proglucagon amino acid sequences from cDNAs and genes isolated from anglerfish in the early 1980s. The finding that GLP-1 is produced in the intestine was a major advance and was published in 1986. GLP-1 was determined to be not just a byproduct but an active hormone with distinct biological functions. The following year, in 1987, scientists identified GLP-1’s powerful ability to stimulate insulin release. It was Lotte Knudsen who developed sustained acting versions of this hormone as a treatment for obesity.
About 12-13% of U.S. adults (roughly 1 in 8) report having ever taken a GLP-1 medication, with 6% currently taking these drugs. Around 62% of people who have taken GLP-1 drugs did so as a treatment for diabetes, heart disease or another chronic condition, with 38% saying they did so mainly to lose weight. This means approximately 4-5% of U.S. adults have used GLP-1s specifically for weight loss. 22% of adults told by doctors they are overweight or obese have tried these medications. About half (54%) of all adults who have taken GLP-1 drugs say it was difficult to afford the cost, including one in five (22%) who say it was “very difficult”. 45% of current patients cite cost as one of the primary reasons for discontinuing their medication. Only 34% of corporate plans currently provide coverage for non-diabetic patients who want to lose weight, and Medicare is currently prohibited from covering these drugs for weight loss. More than 80% of patients with an overweight or obesity diagnosis did not receive a GLP-1 prescription, bariatric surgery or behavioral health service in 2024. The data suggests that while GLP-1s have gained significant attention and adoption, cost and accessibility remain major barriers preventing more widespread use for weight management, despite growing public demand and clinical evidence of effectiveness.
11% of American households have at least one member currently taking a GLP-1. Research shows that these homes cut grocery spending by approximately 5% in the first six months of starting the medication. GLP-1s and the growing push for healthier choices are already impacting the food industry. Sweet snack sales are down 6% year over year. Sales among the 500 largest U.S. restaurant chains grew by only 3.1% in 2024, the lowest annual increase in a decade (excluding the pandemic). There are 5 members of my own extended family that take GLP-1. Three (60%) use it for diabetes. Two (one of those and one without diabetes) have lost meaningful weight with it. The fifth member doesn’t have diabetes, but is just starting it. There is little doubt that the stuff works well.
Now it is reported that Canada may be the first country to make GLP-1s generic and off-patent due to some quirky circumstances. A recent article I read says that such a change could make a big difference in overall economic growth of developed countries. It is said that if adult obesity declined by 50%, the U.S. could save $58 billion annually in health care costs. That’s enough to triple the budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A review of global research found that public health interventions save $34 for every $1 spent on them. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone thought it was worthwhile to monetize the health of America? We could disband The Clean Plate Club altogether.