Prescriptions, Injections, and Body Image: Exploring the Social Impact of Weight Loss Drugs on Eating Disorder Treatment

Eleanore Smukler, CAS '25

Bachelor of Arts: Public Policy

Bachelor of Arts: Sociology

Advised by Professor Dierde Royster

Introduction

In our society that is endlessly obsessed with thinness, the line between medical treatment and societal expectations have become more blurred than ever before. The recent rise of weight loss drugs like “Ozempic” and “Wegovy” have infiltrated the weight loss industry, social media, the pharmaceutical industry, and have found a place in the offices of many weight-loss providers around the country. With this changing landscape of what weight loss entails, including body image and self-discipline, how do providers for the treatment of eating disorders–particularly for weight-loss obsessed patients navigate this environment? Is this new revolutionary tool a step forward for society, or is it just reinforcing societal stereotypes that cause disordered eating in the first place?

This paper will explore the effects of the proliferation of weight-loss prescription medication on patients with diagnosed eating disorders including BED (Binge eating disorder), Bulimia Nervosa, Anorexia Nervosa, including subtypes of these categories. In order to understand the impact of this new medication it is important to first acknowledge the history and rise of GLP-1 as a weight-loss medication. Additionally, I will explore the current research into the effects of this medication on patients with eating disorders as well as the emerging research which suggests potential psychological and behavioral implications of this medication for individuals, including those with eating disorders, of which there is a meager amount. Instead, the current research into GLP-1 medication delves almost exclusively into its efficacy for weight loss and management of metabolic disorders. In order to gain insight into the current landscape of eating disorder treatment–and the potential impact of the proliferation of GLP-1 drugs– I will be interviewing treatment providers at various clinics in New York City. These clinics will include patients in the early recovery stage of disordered eating, as well as in late stages of recovery. Therefore the clinics will include day-treatment centers, weekly treatment centers, as well as long-term wellness and recovery clinics. If GLP-1 drugs are impacting those suffering from eating disorders, these providers, who are on the front lines, should have important insights. From the current research available, this study hypothesizes that in the interview process treatment providers will likely have mixed perceptions of the growing availability of GLP-1 medications, with some viewing it as a helpful tool for weight management, and others expressing concerns about their potential to exacerbate disordered eating behavior.

Semaglutide Background

To understand the rise of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist medication, it is vital to know that it first was not a medication known for weight-loss. Initially this medication was approved by the Federal Drug Administration in 2017 as an antidiabetic medication (Christou et al. 2019). It was effective as an antidiabetic medication due to its ability to lower glucose and its ease of use as a once a week injectable medication. For patients with type 2 diabetes, the medication acts like a hormone called GLP-1 and stimulates the body to create more insulin after eating - preventing the liver from releasing sugar (Riemann 2024).

The stabilizing of blood sugar in diabetic patients was not the only effect seen in patients taking the medication. While not yet FDA-approved for weight-loss, the drug clearly had elements that suited it to being an ideal weight control medication. Going forward to 2025, this is exactly what is occurring in today’s society. Drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy have become the leading medications for weight-loss, although Ozempic is still not FDA-approved. Even without FDA-approval, the medication has received world-wide attention as an anti-obesity medication and has been prescribed off-label by countless providers. Furthermore, despite it not being FDA-approved as a weight-loss medication, that has not stopped the overwhelming display of this drug in ads, posts, and reels across all social media platforms. For instance, an article by Corey H. Basch for the Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health reveals data on Tiktok videos sampled with the hashtag #ozempic . The data shows that 69 videos that “mentions being on/taking Ozempic or others taking/using/planning to use Ozempic” were viewed 43, 284, 218 times, were liked 1,556, 021 times, and were shared 177, 083 times (Basch et al. 2023). Furthermore 57 of 100 videos mentioned Ozempic being used for weight loss with a total of 44, 150, 449 views - more views than simple mentions of the use of Ozempic.

When it comes to the actual results of this medication for the purpose of weight-loss, the results prove that this drug is truly effective. In one of the first clinical trials of semaglutide it was shown that weight loss of a little less than 10% was achieved in 69% of participants of the trial (Sharp 2023). This result is significantly higher than other FDA approved medications for weight loss such as Qsymia, Xenical, and Contrave which all barely met the 5% weight-loss threshold for FDA approval. Another trial showed that 86.5 % of participants achieved a weight-loss of 5% and greater (Singh 2022) with combined changes in lifestyle including exercise. These clinical trials have shown that semaglutide is superior to other drugs when it comes to weight-loss and weight-management. While currently only Wegovy is approved for weight-loss, with the rise of popularity of Ozempic, it is only a matter of time before it is FDA approved as well.

Semaglutide in Disordered Eating Populations

With the increased popularity of semaglutide medications for weight-loss comes the question, how does this affect populations with eating disorders? To begin dismantling this question it is important to note that the effects may be dependent on the category of ED that a person has been diagnosed with. For example, while it may be beneficial for those with BED, it may have negative implications for people with Bulimia. The research on the psychological impact of GLP-1 medication on people with eating disorders is currently scarce, nevertheless it is a topic that requires review and consideration.

Binge eating, a pattern of disordered eating which is classified by the consumption of an abnormally large amount of food in a short period of time (Aoun et. al 2022) and is usually accompanied by a feeling of no control over your actions or emotions during the period of the binge, has a very large correlation to people who are overweight. An article by Bonnie Bruce and Denise Wilfley for the Journal of the American Dietetic Association highlights this correlation from their own research. They suggest that 25% to 50% of obese patients also suffer from binge eating disorder, furthermore, around 1 to 2 million adults have binge eating problems in the US. Additionally, the presence of obesity in patients who have BED is close to 90% (Aoun et al. 2022), showing that most of the population of those with BED are also afflicted with obesity. This correlation shows that many patients who fall into the category of overweight or obese and are prescribed GLP-1 display signs of binge eating behavior, a behavior which has been shown to decrease with the prescribing of Semaglutide medication to the patient.

What does this beneficial treatment mean for the efficacy of prescribing semaglutide to patients for BED or other types of eating disorders however? If GLP-1 medication is capable of curbing binge eating behaviors, does that mean it can also be effective in the treatment of Bulimia or Binge-Purge disorder? Based on an article published in the International Journal Of Eating Disorders by Ruth Weissman, there is a reasonable amount of fear with regards to the efficacy of this drug and its potential to disrupt treatment amongst clinics and providers of ED treatment in the world. It is noted that like many other weight loss drugs, GLP-1 could worsen or play a role in the development of eating disorder pathology, especially on individuals who are in active ED treatment. As it states in the article, “...evidence-based treatment for EDs requires the consumption of regular meals and snacks, GLP-1As effects on satiety/hunger could negatively impact ED treatment… “ (Weissman 2023). However, this is all speculative as trials on patients with eating disorders other than BED, and GLP-1 medication has not been conducted. However, case studies have been done surrounding the dangers of semaglutide on eating disorder populations. For instance, in a study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology there was a case study presented of a patient with Atypical Anorexia Nervosa who misused GLP-1 medication. Her diagnosis was distinctly atypical due to her weight range over time of going from underweight to overweight during cycles of her life, ranging from 43.9 kg to 117 kg. At the time of her being at her highest weight she was prescribed semaglutide medication which she began to abuse through excessive use, with the addition of extremely disordered eating behavior including the use of laxatives, a small calorie intake, being on multiple diets at once, and having unrealistic weight loss goals. This goes to show that the potential risks of having patients with binge eating symptoms be prescribed GLP-1 could have devastating effects on their treatment and their ability to recover from their eating disorder.

So how have clinicians and prescribers dealt with the uncertainty of the impact of GLP-1 medication? It seems that there is no straight answer to that question. The only aspect that is certain is that there has been an incredible influx of patients receiving this medication. In fact, the American Medical Association has noted that prescriptions for GLP-1 medications have increased over 300% in only two years - with the prescriptions going to people not diagnosed with diabetes or obesity (Anon, 2025). Additionally, the main prescribers of this medication have been shown to be nurse practitioners, as well as primary care providers. Neither of which have the necessary expertise including a lack of education on how to identify patients with eating disorders, even if the NP or general practitioner has proper knowledge in the fields of diabetes or obesity. Furthermore, the heavy increase in prescriptions may present an ethical issue in which telehealth platforms are being used by online clinicians to prescribe this medication without a full psychiatric or physical assessment of the patient.

All in all, the medical world remains divided, with researchers claiming GLP-1’s to be a miracle weight loss drug and pharmaceutical companies as well as the rest of society in agreement. Currently, eating disorder providers are confused and uncertain about whether this medication helps patients with BED and other binge related disorders, or whether it undermines treatment completely by reinforcing harmful stereotypes. This absence of certainty within the ED treatment landscape reveals a gap in the literature of semaglutide medication - even though the positive effects of semaglutide are well-documented when it comes to appetite suppression and weight loss, there is far less known about the impact of GLP-1’s on the population dealing with eating disorders or vulnerable to ED thoughts and behaviors. In order to address this gap in the literature, my research focuses on how providers are currently looking at this semaglutide influx into their own facilities.

Methodology

At such an early stage of this medication being used for weight-loss, the ability of a clinical trial to be done quickly enough to keep up with the changing landscape of the weight loss industry is unlikely to occur. Therefore, in order to understand the possible impact that GLP-1 is having on the disordered eating population, it is valuable and practical to listen to “front-line” providers first-hand through one-on-one interviews. Interviews with providers should bring forth data on whether and how the availability of these new drugs is affecting how clinicians are able to assist the ED population in treatment here in New York City, where many drugs can be obtained with and without prescriptions. In comparison to other forms of data collection such as surveys or questionnaires, qualitative research is most feasible for consideration and comprehension of certain emerging phenomena which we are yet to see the full effect of. In an article published in the UK-based journal “English Linguistics Research”, the author discusses the advantages of an open ended interview which offers the chance for both parties to speak freely and also allows for the interviewer to explore various topics without having a concrete formula. The author also adds that maintaining a general checklist “...allows for in-depth probing while permitting the interviewer to keep the interview within the parameters traced out by the aim of the study” (Alshenqeeti 2014). Furthermore, the data that can be obtained through interview-based research can be rich in content and can provide a greater narrative than quantitative research typically provides, though interviews may rely on both some survey-like base questions and additional, open-ended ones, to preserve some of the strengths of standard questions (with predetermined answer sets).

Of course, there has been backlash to the method of interviewing subjects on the basis of Attitudinal Fallacy as discussed by Colin Jerolmack and Shamus Khan in “Talk is Cheap: Ethnography and the Attitudinal Fallacy.” The authors point out that interviews are at risk of inaccuracy due to the inability to know whether, as the authors state, “...people do what they say they do.” In other words, interviews are only capable of accounts of actions and behaviors, but are inadequate for viewing said action for the purpose of verification and validity. Instead, field work which is done via ethnography can view action and behavior of people in certain environments without a veil of deception. In fact the author states that ethnographers have witnessed first-hand the differences between action and words “...in-depth fieldwork highlights how talk and action are ‘dissimilar units that can only be understood in relation to one another.’” (Jerolmack & Khan 2014). Unfortunately, while fieldwork is absolutely essential to the collection of qualitative research, it can also come with ethical, logistical, and practical challenges. When it comes to ethical concerns, fieldwork may put patients in a vulnerable situation where they may feel forced to participate and engage in a study for the sake of treatment. Additionally, confidentiality when it comes to patient care is a barrier to most fieldwork as medical information is sensitive and there are strict guidelines in place such as HIPAA that are meant to protect the confidentiality of patients without any sort of exception when it comes to research. Moreover, a disease such as eating disorders comes with its stigma and fear when it comes to the patients dealing with it and fieldwork may affect the treatment and feeling of comfort that patients have. It may also affect the workflow of providers which can have devastating effects. For these reasons, it is best to conduct interviews with providers in an environment that can be pre-determined and at a time that is most convenient for them.

For this research, the focus will be on eating disorder clinics based in New York. The interviews will mostly consist of providers working at day-treatment clinics in which patients spend a portion of the day in treatment and go home at the end of the day. However, many patients at the beginning of their recovery journey first end up in inpatient or residential treatment centers which are absolutely important to involve as well. In order to ensure an authentic interview experience Alshenqeeti highlights that an interview needs to have four main components: value, trust, meaning, and wording. These four variables are necessary for creating an environment which produces valuable answers and deters the interviewee from refining or having answers that are already set in stone. Therefore, during the interview process some questions will be used to break the ice such as “what led you to start working with patients with eating disorders”, and “what aspects of this work do you find most meaningful, and what challenges do you encounter.” By asking these questions in the beginning of the interview, I can establish rapport with the participant - creating a more comfortable and open conversation.

Discussion

During the research process there were several findings which corroborated the hypothesis - that eating disorder clinicians would have varying views on the effects, both positive and negative, of GLP-1 medication. In conducting the research I was able to speak with 15 eating disorder specialists including social workers, therapists, psychiatrists, and psychologists, who had their own personal opinions and thoughts on semaglutide medication; some even claiming that their views did not align with their day-to-day treatment decisions. There were several key themes that were present in my findings - normalization of pharmacological control over the body, confusion and ambiguity in provider response, desperation and temptation of thinness, and ethical concerns.

The Normalization of Pharmacological Control

The standardization of pharmaceuticals solving every issue has become stagnant in the medical community and amongst eating disorder clinicians - despite their reluctance. The trend in interviews displays a distaste for most medications as a whole without the proper therapy and treatment, and this is made even more apparent when it comes to bringing GLP-1 injections into eating disorder treatment centers. As discussed previously, semaglutide medications have led to improvement in weight loss, appetite control, and binge urges. However, clinicians' reluctance on the reliance of weight loss injections as a tool towards recovery and maintenance of the body is apparent in the majority of interviewees. For the most part, clinicians believe that pharmaceuticals such as GLP-1’s conflict with the complexity of eating disorder treatment in a variety of ways. They describe eating disorders as being highly individualized and a reflection of the patient's social, emotional, and cultural experiences in their life - something that can ultimately only be solved through individualized therapeutic treatment. For instance, provider 1 (will be referring to interview subjects as ‘provider #’) stated in their interview, “...GLP-1 meds like Ozempic can help with weight loss, but using them in eating disorder treatment is tricky. They may reinforce harmful focus on weight or suppress natural hunger cues…it really depends on the individual, their diagnosis, and whether the focus is on health rather than just weight…always needs close medical and psychological supervision…”(Provider 1). This clinician highlighted the importance of individualized treatment with patients with eating disorders, noting the importance of treatment through CBT and DBT and maintaining a constant form of communication and supervision with the patient. Another provider (provider 10), adds that, “...we need to be incredibly cautious. While GLP-1 medications can be effective for weight management in some populations, using them in the context of eating disorder treatment raises a lot of red flags…we’re working to normalize eating patterns, reduce food fear, and shift focus away from weight…there may be some very specific cases where it’s appropriate-like severe binge eating disorder with comorbid obesity-but even then, it has to be monitored very closely, ideally with a multidisciplinary team” (Provider 10). This clinician, a therapist working with both adults and minors, delves into both the pros and cons of GLP-1 medication, highlighting how difficult it would be to regulate or integrate GLP-1’s into treatment protocols on a formal level as each patient requires their own specialized form of treatment, and what helps one patient may harm another. Additionally, the providers highlight that by relying so heavily on medications such as GLP’s, it only reinforces the societal belief that eating disorders are solely due to a chemical imbalance or weight-related problem, and not a complex psychological and sociocultural issue.

Confusion & Ambiguity in Provider Response

The responses of interviewees and even those that refused to interview laid out the confusion and ambivalence towards GLP-1 medication in their own setting as well as how to respond to it when prescribed by external providers outside of their network of care. While this does display a lack of proper guidelines for the medication, it also conveys a conflict of opinions amongst the medical community and tension with regards to dealing with the inevitable - the influx of patients using this medication with or without the consent of providers. Several providers feel that they have been ‘caught off guard’ by the patients’ who already come into their clinics on GLP and are unwilling to stop using the medication. Provider 3 states, “...if someone uses these meds, it's no longer really recovery because we are engaging in ED behaviors. I would then take a harm reduction approach if the patient is not willing to stop the meds….”(provider 3). Provider 3’s shift towards a harm reduction approach shows a clear dilemma that clinicians face - whether to stay committed to the traditional recovery model or to adapt to the rapidly evolving landscape of pharmacology. In this case, if a patient is not willing to get off the medication, the transition from an abstinence-based approach in treatment for all behaviors to a harm reduction approach is a smart move to attempt to meet patients halfway, but it also leads to great unease with whether treatment providers are actually treating or simply enabling their patients.

However, other providers believe in the case-by-case approach for every patient, with some patients only improving from the use of GLP-1’s and others requiring a more traditional approach. One provider referenced one of her patients who had significant life improvements from a pharmacological approach with the use of GLP medication. “...eating disorders are like brain tumors so I think for many people with binge eating disorder or bulimia, I think GLP-1 can heal them. I’ve seen this change people’s lives in many ways. I just had one girl who was able to finish college while maintaining an 80 pound weight loss and form a proper relationship with food and her body” (Provider 12). This contrast between providers highlights how fragmented the field has become due to this new medication. While provider 12 sees pharmacological intervention as life-changing, other providers believe it is just another tool for those with eating disorders to continue their disordered behaviors under the guise of medical legitimacy. This ambiguity in provider response to whether GLP-1’s are beneficial or not complicates maintaining the traditional priorities of eating disorder treatment which is to focus on weight restoration, changing behavior, and self-healing.

Desperation and Temptation of Thinness

Due to the bombardment of the benefits of GLP-1 medication from social media influencers, celebrities, and advertisements, there was an influx of people looking to take semaglutide, despite whether they need it or not. Furthermore this widespread cultural phenomenon has led many patients to undermine provider authority and obtaining medication through less than proper means. One provider, (provider 2) discussed her own experience with a young patient and their mother, “...in this particular case both the kid and mom had eating disorders and the kid was trying to recover, but the mom told them they were too fat so they would drive in the middle of the night to get a shot in the middle of a parking lot…” (Provider 2). This anecdote underscores the conflict between providers and their patients to provide the best form of treatment when people tend to attempt to bypass traditional medical oversight and therapeutic frameworks to the best of their ability. It also illustrates how deeply social dynamics have affected patients and those around them to the point where providers are aware that their patients are bypassing the formal treatment structure and are actively undermining recovery by pursuing unregulated access to GLP-1’s. This is not only dangerous for the patient, but it also creates an air of distrust and tension in recovery which clouds decision making in treatment for both parties. One of the most vital aspects of treatment is having an open level of communication between provider and patient; when that is compromised, there is no way of establishing whether a patient is truly progressing their recovery.

This also leads to the conversation of a lack of collaboration between mental health providers and other clinicians who do not have the same training and knowledge of how to spot an eating disorder - allowing for patients to simply find a doctor who is willing to prescribe the weight loss injection to their patients without knowing the full consequences of their actions. Provider 9 states, “... at the end of the day, if a patient is desperate to obtain GLP’s, they will find a way to do so. Another provider adds that “there are not enough medical providers who are educated on HAES [Health at Every Size]. In my personal experience most MD’s are reluctant to be educated by mental health providers surrounding these topics…”(Provider 8). Therefore, for instance, collaboration between eating disorder providers and general practitioners is key to maintaining transparency about a patient, but the professional hierarchy which exists within the medical field makes it difficult for collaboration to exist currently. As GLP-1 medication becomes more normalized within our society, having such a split in the medical community affects how this medication is being managed and controlled.

Ethical Concerns

These gaps and inconsistencies found in the intersection between physicians and mental health providers leads to confusion in what the proper treatment protocol should be and also raises questions regarding respecting patient autonomy whilst also upholding the proper standards for care. Previously this paper discussed the dilemma between sticking to the traditional course of action when it comes to treatment and using a more casual approach with patients, especially those who come already using GLP-1 medications. For many providers the balance between patient autonomy and following the treatment guidelines they have always used creates a moral dilemma for mental health providers. One provider notes, “...on the one hand, as providers, we want to respect patient autonomy-they have the right to make decisions about their health. But we also have an obligation to do no harm. If someone has a history of an eating disorder, and they’re asking for a drug that suppresses appetite or reinforces weight loss as a goal, we have to ask - are we supporting their health or are we unintentionally fueling disordered thinking. There’s also the question of informed consent-are they truly aware of the psychological risks involved…”(provider 15). Another provider also discusses the issue of whether patients even have the ability to make decisions on their own, especially in the beginning of their recovery journey, “...I would say that what is not new is that if a patient is engaging in behaviors, meaning anything that has or can alter emotional and physical health, as well as well-being - it is a potential risk factor in my eyes. I would most likely in my private practice setting, not agree to work with someone using GLP in a disordered way…”(Provider 3). This speaks to the fact that many providers are simply growing uncomfortable with being able to provide treatment to their patients in this difficult landscape. Instead of taking on the challenge of a patient with severe disordered thoughts, they would rather pass on such a difficult case. This dilemma is also present in providers who refuse to speak to me due to their own conflicting feelings when it comes to what they do in their practice and their own personal beliefs. This growing discomfort of being transparent and knowledgeable professionals in their field of care is only leading to a broader concern of a lack of confidence amongst providers with their ability to treat eating disorders. With providers having to contend with patient choices and with the pharmaceutical industry which is incentivising weight loss instead of prioritizing long-term mental health outcomes, the ethical landscape for clinicians leads to internalized pressure and uncertainty for the future.

Overall, the introduction of GLP-1 medications has created a state of disarray amongst the eating disorder treatment community - where providers are forced to confront clinical, emotional, and ethical challenges that they are far from prepared for. While some providers feel that it is best to handle the introduction of GLP-1’s smoothly by allowing it into their practices, others feel that there is a great concern with allowing for a weight loss medication to become normalized amongst clinicians as it would only emphasize the weight loss perspective. Furthermore, many providers feel uncertain about how much control they can have over their patients.

Study Limitations

There were certain limitations in my study which may have affected the findings. For instance my research was based on interviews with 15 eating disorder providers which took place either over phone call or over zoom. Furthermore these providers all work in either private practices or in day treatment clinics. This means that my findings may not be general to all providers, especially primary care doctors, as well as in-patient, residential, or providers working in hospitals. Additionally, all my interview subjects are based in New York which means that while providers opinions may be mixed in New York State; elsewhere opinions may vary amongst clinicians.

Additionally, whilst semi-structured interviews with eating disorder providers did allow for great insight into their thoughts and beliefs, there were certain limitations that came with this. First, the study only focused on the thoughts of clinicians towards GLP-1 medication and did not at all do interviews with patients, families of patients, other physicians, or anyone else involved in patient care which creates a one-sided view of the topic surrounding the integration of GLP-1 medication into eating disorder treatment. Whilst providers may have a certain view, the parents and families of patients may have more insight into the well-being of the patient and what is best for them simply due to their ability to know the patient far better than any clinician would.

Conclusion

In all, GLP-1 medications like Ozempic and Wegovy have complicated the outlook of eating disorder treatment in various ways by splitting up clinicians, creating wider gaps between medical providers, and pushing stereotypes of what health, recovery, and the ideal weight is. In the interviews with providers this research has displayed the confusion amongst clinicians, ethical hesitancy when it comes to patient autonomy and following protocol, as well as working with patients for whom the temptation of GLP-1 medication is alarming. The growing normalization of weight loss injections reflects societal pressures that continue to prioritize thinness above all else, including the mental, emotional, and physical well-being of people. Those vulnerable to eating disorders or who are in various stages of recovery are especially at risk of obtaining GLP-1 medication through any means necessary and whilst for some patients who are recommended GLP-1’s are able to control their binge urges and appetite, it also poses as a great risk for long term recovery and understanding natural body cues for many patients.

Ultimately, this research has shown separation amongst the medical community, especially the eating disorder treatment community when it comes to proper care. Some providers believe that semaglutide are beneficial to patients with binge eating disorder, bulimia, and various other disorders, others feel that if a patient is actively seeking the medication, it is best to work with them and find a proper treatment option that would best suit their needs, and other providers feel very strongly against the use of GLP’s in their treatment facilities and even refuse to work with patients who are unwilling to let go of the medication. This raises many questions not only about the future of eating disorder treatment, but also how societal forces continue to shape our relationships with our bodies, our mental well-being, and our need for control.

Future research should focus on studying the long-term outcomes of GLP-1 use in patients with active or previously known eating disorders. By conducting longitudinal studies we would get a better understanding of how semaglutide interacts with the recovery process for patients which includes their thoughts on: body image, emotional regulation, and listening to body signals for things like intuitive eating. Furthermore, research should look into how prescribers and other treatment providers can collaborate with each other in order to improve communication and minimize harm to the patients. Also, listening to patients and conducting interviews with current or previous patients can help us obtain a better understanding of patient experiences in clinics and the sort of access to mental health care they have - especially patients from marginalized communities and low-income backgrounds. These patients face many barriers when it comes to not just receiving the proper eating disorder treatment, but also accessing proper medications that may be necessary for them. By understanding the perspectives of providers and patients we may be able to build a healthcare system for ED treatment which focuses on a patient’s well-being, their autonomy, and healthcare equity, but also critically evaluates the use of GLP-1 medications to ensure they support-and not undermine recovery and long-term health outcomes.

Works Cited

Alshenqeeti, H. (2014). Interviewing as a data collection method: A critical review. English Linguistics Research, 3(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v3n1p39

Anonymous. (n.d.). Survey report: Primary care perspectives on GLP-1 prescriptions. Omada Health. https://resourcecenter.omadahealth.com/for-employers/survey-report-primary-care-perspectives-on-glp-1-prescriptions

Basch, C. H., Narayanan, S., Tang, H., Fera, J., & Basch, C. E. (2023). Descriptive analysis of TikTok videos posted under the hashtag #Ozempic. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 1, 1–3.

Christou, G. A., Katsiki, N., Blundell, J., Fruhbeck, G., & Kiortsis, D. N. (2019). Semaglutide as a promising anti-obesity drug. Obesity Reviews, 20(6), 805–815. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12894

Guerdjikova, A. I., Ward, A., Ontiveros, M., & McElroy, S. L. (2024). Semaglutide misuse in atypical anorexia nervosa—a case report. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 44(2), 179–180. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0000000000001765

Jerolmack, C., & Khan, S. (2014). Talk is cheap: Ethnography and the attitudinal fallacy. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(2), 178–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500470

Lamont, M., & Swidler, A. (2014). Methodological pluralism and the possibilities and limits of interviewing. Qualitative Sociology, 37(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-014-9274-z

Muñoz, E. (2024). Assessing trends in utilization and off-label prescribing for Ozempic, a glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist. Value in Health. https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1098-3015(14)00644-5

Riemann, L. (2024). Your guide to Ozempic for diabetes – What you need to know. WebMD. https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/ozempic-type-2-diabetes

Sharp, G., Ali, R., Gale, L., Rees, G., & Hay, P. (2023). New anti-obesity medications: Considerations and future directions in people with concurrent eating disorders. Australian Journal of General Practice, 52(9), 651–653. https://doi.org/10.31128/AJGP-09-22-6582

Singh, G., Krauthamer, M., & Bjalme-Evans, M. (2021). Wegovy (semaglutide): A new weight loss drug for chronic weight management. Journal of Investigative Medicine, 70(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1136/jim-2021-001908