Group dining while on GLP-1s? It's complicated.
Foote, a lawyer, said that the majority of his friends are on these medications, creating a new dynamic when they go out to eat.
They usually order appetizers and entrees to share; his friends will take a few bites, and he will finish the rest. 'I am a 6-foot-4, 210-pound guy, and I get quite hungry,' said Foote, 36, with a laugh.
Get Winter Soup Club
A six-week series featuring soup recipes and cozy vibes, plus side dishes and toppings, to get us all through the winter.
Enter Email
Sign Up
They still dine out often, 'even though it's a complete charade for them.' As long as they still split the bill — which they usually do — he is fine with the arrangement. 'I think if I were a more self-conscious person, I would care that I was the only person being a little Miss Piggy over here,' he said. 'But I love food. Some people eat to live. I love to eat.'
Advertisement
Morgan Stanley Research analysts estimate that 24 million people, or 7 percent of Americans, will be taking a GLP-1 by 2035. As weight-loss drugs soar in popularity, diners on and off them are wrestling with a number of restaurant etiquette quandaries, and in some cases changing their dining habits as a result.
Advertisement
Diners on GLP-1s are figuring out which types of restaurants they feel comfortable visiting; how to leave food on their plates without insulting the chef or their dining companions; and how to get the most value out of the experience. Those not on the drugs are contending with the pros and cons of going out with people who don't do much eating.
'There is a social component to this,' said David Wiss, a nutritionist in Los Angeles with a doctorate in public health. 'We are in a period of flux and change, and people are learning how to navigate this.'
Nine months ago, Will Farmer, a talent agent in London, started taking the diabetes drug Mounjaro, a GLP-1 that many have used off-label to lose weight. Shortly after, he went to a 10-course tasting meal for a work event and could only eat a little of each course. 'I was eating a quarter of a Scotch egg,' he said. The restaurant emailed the event's host to ask if everything was OK. 'They were worried I found the food disgusting,' said Farmer, 34.
Now he eats only at restaurants that serve family-style dishes or small plates so it isn't as obvious when he doesn't finish his food. 'If you go to a steak restaurant, it's weird if you leave most of it,' he said. 'But when we are all sharing, the food disappears and it's not this individual shame of leaving food behind.'
As a self-described foodie and a wine and spirits publicist in New York City, Lauren Wire loves to go out to eat and order a lot of dishes. 'I want to try everything,' she said.
Advertisement
But as soon as she sits down, she warns everyone from the server to her dining companions that she is on a GLP-1. 'The chef might come out to say hi, or I might be on a date, and I will joke that I need a box because I am on Ozempic,' said Wire, 36. 'I don't want them to think I don't like the food, and also I want to normalize this.'
It's all worth the leftovers: She likes that she can save money and enjoy the same amount of food over a longer stretch of time.
Wire thinks those who dine with her and are not on the drugs only benefit. 'I still over-order, and then they get to eat more of my food,' she said, laughing.
Non-dinner meetings have been the hardest for Joseph Suchodolski, a fashion consultant in New York City who has taken Mounjaro for more than two years to treat his diabetes. He tends to snack during the day, and will often insist on having just a coffee at a breakfast meeting.
But during a recent morning meeting in Los Angeles, he learned his companion was also on a GLP-1. 'We both ordered breakfast, and we were just moving it around the plate,' said Suchodolski, 38. When they finally shared why, they started laughing and opening up.
Wiss said it's important for patients who are new to GLP-1s to consider how they might handle social situations that can arise from eating less in public. 'When people stop drinking alcohol, for example, it's helpful for them to think through how they will respond when people offer them a drink or a waiter is disappointed they don't order wine,' he said. 'We are seeing that re-created with food.'
Advertisement
Some people say GLP-1s have improved the experience of eating at restaurants, though.
After struggling with childhood obesity, Jackson Lemay, a content creator in Atlanta, used to feel anxious that he was eating too fast or too much while dining out. He would obsess over the menu before he got to the restaurant and shame himself if he ordered something unhealthy or too large.
After taking a GLP-1 for a year and a half, that 'food noise' is gone. 'It has made me feel more confident in eating in public,' said Lemay, 27. He has never enjoyed restaurants as much as he does now.
There are some people not on the drugs who refuse to dine out with people on them, though they were hesitant to say so on the record. They say they're embarrassed by full plates sent back to the kitchen, or insecure about eating more than the person across the table.
But Nathaly del Carmen loves being around people with smaller appetites. Her mother, sister, and many of her friends are on GLP-1s, and she estimates that at least one person at her table is on them whenever she dines out.
Del Carmen, a marketing manager in New York, said she finds herself mirroring the behavior of those on the drugs, which means she eats less and doesn't feel pressure to finish her meal if she isn't hungry. 'It helps me with impulse control,' she said.
Emerging research shows GLP-1s may also curb one's appetite for alcohol. Del Carmen, 31, said some of her friends on the drugs cannot have more than one or two drinks without getting violently ill, which helps her drink less. 'They are the opposite of the one friend who eggs you on to drink more or have one more martini.'
Advertisement
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Rural hospitals brace for financial hits or even closure under Republicans' $1 trillion Medicaid cut
OMAHA, Neb. — Tyler Sherman, a nurse at a rural Nebraska hospital, is used to the area's aging farmers delaying care until they end up in his emergency room. Now, with the Trump administration planning around $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years, he fears those farmers and the more than 3,000 residents of Webster County could lose not just the ER, but also the clinic and nursing home tied to the hospital. 'Our budget is pretty heavily reliant on the Medicaid reimbursement, so if we do see a cut of that, it'll be difficult to keep the doors open,' said Sherman, who works at Webster County Community Hospital in the small Nebraska town of Red Cloud just north of the Kansas border. If those facilities close, many locals would see their five-minute trip to Webster County hospital turn into a nearly hour-long ride to the nearest hospital offering the same services. 'That's a long way for an emergency,' Sherman said. 'Some won't make it.' States and rural health advocacy groups warn that cutting Medicaid — a program serving millions of low-income and disabled Americans — would hit already fragile rural hospitals hard and could force hundreds to close, stranding some people in remote areas without nearby emergency care. More than 300 hospitals could be at risk for closure under the 'Big Beautiful Bill Act,' according to an analysis by the Cecil G. Sheps Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which tracks rural hospital closures. Even as Congress haggled over the controversial bill, a health clinic in the southwest Nebraska town of Curtis announced Wednesday it would close in the coming months, in part blaming the anticipated Medicaid cuts. Bruce Shay of Pomfret, Conn., fears he and his wife could be among those left in the lurch. At 70, they're both in good health, he said. But that likely means that if either needs to go to a hospital, 'it's going to be an emergency.' Day Kimball Hospital is nearby in Putnam, but it has faced recent financial challenges. Day Kimball's CEO R. Kyle Kramer acknowledged that the bill passed Thursday — estimated to cut federal Medicaid spending in rural areas by $155 billion over 10 years — would further hurt his facility's bottom line. Roughly 30% of Day Kimball's current patients receive Medicaid benefits, a figure that's even higher for specific, critical services like obstetrics and behavioral health. 'An emergency means I'm 45 minutes to an hour away from the nearest hospital, and that's a problem,' Shay said. And he and his wife wouldn't be the only ones having to make that trip. 'You've got, I'm sure, thousands of people who rely on Day Kimball Hospital. If it closed, thousands of people would have to go to another hospital,' he said. 'That's a huge load to suddenly impose on a hospital system that's probably already stretched thin.' Rural hospitals have long operated on the financial edge, especially in recent years as Medicaid payments have continuously fallen below the actual cost to provide healthcare. More than 20% of Americans live in rural areas, where Medicaid covers 1 in 4 adults, according to the nonprofit KFF, which studies healthcare issues. President Trump's $4.5-trillion tax breaks and spending cuts plan would worsen rural hospitals' struggles by cutting a key federal program that helps states fund Medicaid payments to healthcare providers. To help offset the lost tax revenue, the package includes $1.2 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and other social safety net programs — cuts they insist only root out fraud and waste in the system. But public outcry over Medicaid cuts led Republicans to include a provision that will provide $10 billion annually to buttress rural hospitals over the next five years, or $50 billion in total. Many rural hospital advocates are wary that it won't be enough to cover the shortfall. Carrie Cochran-McClain, chief policy officer with the National Rural Health Assn., said rural hospitals already struggle to break even, citing a recent American Hospital Assn. report that found that hospitals in 2023 got nearly $28 billion less from Medicaid than the actual cost of treating Medicaid patients. 'We see rural hospitals throughout the country really operating on either negative or very small operating margins,' Cochran-McClain said. 'Meaning that any amount of cut to a payer — especially a payer like Medicaid that makes up a significant portion of rural provider funding — is going to be consequential to the rural hospitals' ability to provide certain services or maybe even keep their doors open at the end of the day.' A KFF report shows 36 states losing $1 billion or more over 10 years in Medicaid funding for rural areas under the Republican bill, even with the $50 billion rural fund. No state stands to lose more than Kentucky. The report estimates the Bluegrass State would lose a whopping $12.3 billion — nearly $5 billion more than the next state on the list. That's because the bill ends Kentucky's unique Medicaid reimbursement system and reduces it to Medicare reimbursement levels. Kentucky currently has one of the lowest Medicare reimbursement rates in the country. It also has one of the highest poverty rates, leading to a third of its population being covered by Medicaid. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a two-term Democrat widely seen as a potential candidate for president in 2028, said the bill would close 35 hospitals in his state and pull healthcare coverage for 200,000 residents. 'Half of Kentucky's kids are covered under Medicaid. They lose their coverage and you are scrambling over that next prescription,' Beshear said during an appearance on MSNBC. 'This is going to impact the life of every single American negatively. It is going to hammer our economy.' Beck and Haigh write for the Associated Press. Haigh reported from Hartford, Conn.
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
See clearly underwater with the best swim goggles
Over 90 million Americans swim in pools, lakes and oceans every year, and one-third of that group swims regularly for fitness. No matter where you swim, a good pair of goggles are essential. Goggles help the swimmer see beneath them, while also raising their head above the water line without having to wipe their eyes. Swimming goggles also protect the eyes from chlorine, salt or insects depending on where you are swimming. When it comes to keeping the water out of your eyes and a wide view of what's in front of you, the top choice is the Speedo Vanquisher 2.0 Mirrored Swim Goggle. Fun vs. fitness While swimming goggles can be used for all situations, you may choose different types of goggles depending on your reason for being in the water. If you are relaxing on a summer day in the lake or a public swimming pool, not all of the cutting-edge features of performance goggles may be necessary. If you are completing your regular workout or training for a triathlon, then having extra-tight seals and panoramic lenses may be ideal. Types of swim goggles There are many types of goggles, each with a different purpose. Leisure goggles are the most common and used for recreational swimming as well as swimming laps. They are designed for comfort but still provide a strong seal. Mask goggles cover most of your face and have a very tight seal. They are excellent for being able to look around at your surroundings (similar to snorkeling), but provide too much drag to be used for fitness swimming. Performance goggles are smaller with less cushion around the seal. They are used by professional athletes to reduce the amount of drag they face in the water. A substyle in this category are Swedish goggles, which are designed to cover the eye only and typically don't last long. Most manufacturers also produce goggles to fit children. Lens types There are different types of lenses to choose from for most goggles. Clear goggles are best for indoor swimming or during cloudy conditions. Mirrored goggles are best for sunny days. You can get tinted lenses, which moderately protect against the sun, polarized lenses which provide significant sun protection, or you can even get transition lenses that change according to the amount of light in the swimming area. Comfortable but tight fit One of the most important aspects of swimming goggles is the ability to keep water out of your eyes without being so tight that they make your face hurt. The combination of seals, head straps and nose clips will make up your overall comfort. You want all of them to be snug, but not so tight that it's painful. Gaskets Most leisure goggles come with either silicone, rubber or foam gaskets. These help protect the skin while a seal is formed against the water. You may need to test different materials before finding the one right for you. Racing goggles typically do not have any gaskets. Antifog coating Swimming goggles with an antifog coating help keep the goggles from becoming blurry while you swim, which often requires rinsing them out. Unfortunately, this coating will wear out over time, even with higher-priced goggles. The best way to keep the coating intact is to take care of your goggles according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Swim goggles cost as little as $10-$20 for basic and children's models, while those with adjustable straps and antifog coating are priced between $20-$50. High-performance goggles with transition lenses or prescription lenses can cost over $50. What if I need prescription goggles? A. There are prescription goggles available for people who wear glasses and prefer to keep the ability to see clearly while underwater. Why do my goggles keep fogging up? A. Even antifog goggles can get partially blurry with too much condensation. Over time, the antifog coating will wear off. There are some spray-on antifog products available. Why do my goggles keep leaking? A. It is likely that a gasket in the seal is wearing out due to exposure to chlorine or just long-term use. You should also make sure the goggles haven't been bent from improper storage. Another reason, which seems counterintuitive, is that you may have the goggles on too tightly. Overly restricted goggles can actually lead to water getting inside the lenses. Top swim goggles Speedo Vanquisher 2.0 Mirrored Swim Goggle What you need to know: For swimming in bright sunshine, these goggles set the standard with mirrored lenses. What you'll love: In addition to panoramic minimal-glare lenses, these goggles have cushioned silicone seals that keep water out and an adjustable head strap. Different-sized nose clips are included for maximizing overall fit. What you should consider: The mirrored lenses can make swimming difficult indoors or at night. Top swim goggles for the money ActivAqua Wide View Swimming Goggles What you need to know: These wide-lens goggles have unique design features that help them stay in place and last for a long time. What you'll love: The wide lenses are UV-plated and antifog-plated and come with double silicone seals. A one-snap buckle strap is easy to adjust, even while swimming. The goggles come with a protective case that drains quickly. What you should consider: These goggles are easily adjusted everywhere except the nosepiece. Worth checking out Aqua Sphere Kayenne Swim Goggles What you need to know: These multi-feature goggles are ideal for swimmers of all ages and abilities. What you'll love: Patented curve technology creates a 180-degree view. UV-protected and antifog clear lenses allow natural sunlight. Quick-fit straps and a stabilizing nose piece make for a tight, yet comfortable fit. What you should consider: There have been some reports of the lenses scratching. BestReviews spends thousands of hours researching, analyzing and testing products to recommend the best picks for most consumers. BestReviews and its newspaper partners may earn a commission if you purchase a product through one of our links. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Newsweek
5 hours ago
- Newsweek
New Study Says Skip the Hot Dogs This Fourth of July
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As Americans fire up their grills for the Fourth of July, a new study published in Nature Medicine says that there is no safe amount of hot dogs—or any processed meat—to consume. The study, led by Dr. Demewoz Haile of the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, found that even small daily servings of processed meat significantly increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, colorectal cancer, and heart disease. The findings arrive just as Americans are expected to consume over 150 million hot dogs during the holiday weekend. Health experts are urging moderation, if not outright avoidance, of processed meats, sugary drinks, and trans fats. The study analyzed data from over 60 prior studies and employed a burden-of-proof methodology to evaluate the strength of the evidence. Hot dogs are ready for the 2025 Nathan's Famous Fourth of July hot dog eating competition at Coney Island in the Brooklyn borough of New York on July 4, 2025. Hot dogs are ready for the 2025 Nathan's Famous Fourth of July hot dog eating competition at Coney Island in the Brooklyn borough of New York on July 4, It Matters Hot dogs are a staple of July 4 celebrations, but this research contributes to a growing body of evidence linking processed meats to an increased risk of chronic disease. With diet-related illnesses already among the leading causes of death in the U.S., the study speaks to the need for more transparent communication about the risks of everyday foods that are deeply embedded in American culture. What To Know Eating just 50 grams of processed meat daily—the weight of a typical hot dog—is associated with an 11 percent higher risk of type 2 diabetes and a 7 percent higher risk of colorectal cancer. The study also found links between sugary drinks and ischemic heart disease and between trans fats and elevated cholesterol. Researchers concluded that there is no safe level of habitual consumption of processed meats, sugary drinks, or trans fats. The strongest associations were observed even at low levels of intake, suggesting that regular consumption—regardless of the amount—poses measurable health risks. The research pooled data from over 60 studies and applied a burden-of-proof risk function to assess the strength and consistency of the evidence. While observational, the study's scale and statistical rigor make its findings difficult to ignore. Dr. Nita Forouhi of the University of Cambridge, who was not involved in the study, said the findings support existing dietary guidelines to limit processed meat, per CNN. Other experts emphasized that occasional indulgence is unlikely to cause harm, but regular consumption should be avoided. The study's release coincides with the annual Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest and a weekend when Americans traditionally consume millions of hot dogs. Health officials are using the moment to encourage healthier grilling choices and raise awareness about long-term dietary risks. What People Are Saying Authors of Health effects associated with consumption of processed meat, sugar-sweetened beverages and transfatty acids: a Burden of Proof study: "We observed a statistically in type 2 diabetes risk associated with higher processed meat consumption; that is, disease risk increased with increased intake." Dr. Demewoz Haile, the study's lead author, told CNN.: "Habitual consumption of even small amounts of processed meat, sugary drinks and trans fatty acids is linked to increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease and colorectal cancer. What Happens Next While the study is unlikely to stop Americans from enjoying hot dogs this weekend, it may influence future dietary guidelines and public health campaigns.
