New research examines how GLP-1 medications like Ozempic influence food waste and consumption patterns as sugar consumption weighs heavily on the environment.
The rise of GLP-1 medications, such as Ozempic and Wegovy, has not only transformed weight management but is also influencing consumer behavior, particularly in food consumption and waste. A recent study from The Ohio State University delved into these effects, revealing that while some users report increased food waste, others experience a decline, especially as they adjust to the medication.
In a survey of 505 U.S. adults currently on GLP-1 medications, 25 percent acknowledged wasting more food since starting the drugs, whereas 61 percent disagreed. Notably, individuals experiencing nausea — a common side effect — were more prone to increased food waste. Conversely, those on the medication for longer than a year and those incorporating more vegetables into their diets reported less food waste. Senior author Brian Roe, professor at The Ohio State University, said the fact that food waste appears to decrease as patients acclimate to the medication suggests there may be a fairly simple remedy, “advising patients new to these medications about the possibility of discarding food as their diets change, which could reduce food waste and lower their spending.”
Published in the journal Nutrients, this research offers a preliminary look into how anti-obesity drugs might impact food production and waste on both national and global scales. With approximately one-third of food in the United States wasted — half of which is attributed to consumers discarding an average of one pound per person daily — understanding these dynamics is crucial.
As of spring 2024, six percent of U.S. adults reported using GLP-1 agonists, which treat type 2 diabetes and obesity by mimicking a hormone in the small intestine to regulate blood sugar, slow stomach emptying, and signal fullness to the brain. In the study, nearly 70 percent of participants were taking semaglutide (Ozempic, Rybelsus, Wegovy), and about 25 percent were on terzepatide (Mounjaro).
While nausea emerged as the primary factor for increased food waste, the study also suggested that shifting food preferences might lead individuals to discard items they no longer favor. Overall, participants reported consuming more produce, protein, fish, and healthy fats, while reducing intake of alcohol, pasta, other carbohydrates, fried foods, sweets, and dairy. Interestingly, meat consumption remained neutral, with no significant increase or decrease reported.
The addition of vegetables — a food group commonly wasted in the U.S. — was associated with a lower likelihood of food waste, indicating that dietary changes toward more vegetable-rich meals could mitigate waste. Given the increasing prescription rates of GLP-1 agonists, understanding their broader economic and environmental impacts is essential. Roe noted, “People taking these medications in all likelihood will be spending less on food, but whether there is a chance to offset the cost of the drug through reduction in food spending remains to be seen.”
Previous studies have used simulations to demonstrate that reducing food consumption at the population level can lower energy costs, conserve land and water resources, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions by reducing food waste in landfills. However, due to the relatively recent introduction of anti-obesity medications, there is insufficient data to predict their societal effects comprehensively. Roe emphasized, “I think it’s clear that novel anti-obesity medications have a chance to impact global public health, and research suggests changes in intake of food can affect indicators of environmental impacts.”
Those findings come as a recent look at sugar’s environmental toll showed sugar consumption has surged to unprecedented levels, quadrupling over the last 60 years, now accounting for approximately eight percent of total caloric intake. Yet, despite sugar’s prevalence, the substance contributes little to nutrition. Added sugars are devoid of essential nutrients like vitamins or fiber, offering “empty calories” that exacerbate significant health issues. As obesity rates climb worldwide, some studies estimate that half the global population could be obese by 2035.
The financial toll is staggering: a modest 20 percent reduction in sugar intake in the U.S. alone could save $10.3 billion in healthcare costs. But sugar’s impacts extend far beyond the human body. From environmental destruction to opportunities for more sustainable uses, the implications of sugar production and consumption demand global attention.
While sugar’s health impacts are well-documented, its environmental consequences remain underexplored, even though sugar is the most cultivated crop by mass on Earth. Producing sugar disrupts ecosystems, contributes to biodiversity loss, and pollutes water through fertilizer and mill runoff. In biodiverse tropical regions, such as Brazil and India — key hubs of sugar production — the environmental costs are particularly high.
Reducing sugar consumption to recommended levels (five percent of daily caloric intake) could free up vast tracts of agricultural land, enabling rewilding efforts that promote carbon sequestration and biodiversity. By transitioning these sugar-growing lands to alternative uses, significant environmental benefits could be realized.
One innovative approach involves diverting sugar from human consumption to alternative, environmentally friendly applications. The research highlights several possibilities, including using sugar to produce bioplastics or biofuels. Such a shift could have profound implications for reducing fossil fuel reliance and plastic waste.
Redirected sugar could replace approximately 20 percent of the global polyethylene market, one of the most common plastics used in packaging and piping. Alternatively, sugar could be used to create ethanol for transportation. Brazil, a global leader in ethanol production, already uses sugar for this purpose, producing around 85 percent of the world’s supply. However, instead of increasing sugar cultivation, repurposing dietary sugars could sustain this output while reducing the crop’s overall environmental burden.
Another promising avenue involves using sugar to feed microbes that produce protein. This microbial protein could provide a sustainable alternative to traditional animal-based proteins; if implemented at scale, this solution could feed an estimated 521 million people regularly and, if used to replace meat, drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions. Replacing chicken protein with microbial alternatives could reduce emissions by nearly 250 million metric tons annually, with even greater savings for beef.
While the benefits of reducing sugar consumption are clear, the shift poses challenges for the sprawling sugar supply chain. Spanning more than 100 countries and supporting millions of livelihoods, the sugar industry is deeply entrenched. National policies like sugar taxes could drive consumption changes, but international collaboration will be critical to managing supply chain transitions without devastating producers.
The World Health Organization has long advocated for reduced sugar intake and could play a pivotal role in coordinating global efforts to repurpose sugar production. Collaborative initiatives, such as sugar transition partnerships, could unite producer and consumer nations to create sustainable pathways for the crop’s future. Policymakers might even fund these transitions using a portion of the healthcare savings generated by lower sugar consumption.
Related on Ethos:
