Reply: The ethics of Ozempic and Wegovy

Räsänen and Ahola-Launonen recently offered a commentary on an ethical analysis I co-authored with Julian Savulescu on the use of semaglutide-based weight-loss drugs such as Ozempic. In this response, I continue the discussion by engaging their concerns about the narrow framing of our analysis with respect to the structural determinants of health and the conditions of autonomy, as well as the role of race, class and gender in shaping stigma and access to treatment. I argue that Räsänen and Ahola-Launonen's critique and the conclusion they draw are largely in alignment with our paper and that the absence in our account of a more expansive conception of autonomy and a broader discussion of race, class and gender are fair criticisms. In what follows, I add nuance to these dimensions and caution against critiques of unjust structures that risk reproducing injustice by inadvertently denying the agency, self-respect and inclusion of marginalised groups.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Ethics
Published
2025-10-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2025-111420
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics in medical practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.82
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reply: The ethics of Ozempic and Wegovy

Nanette Ryan
1 citations
Journal of Medical Ethics
Ethics in medical practice
2.82
article

Reply: The ethics of Ozempic and Wegovy

Nanette Ryan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Räsänen and Ahola-Launonen recently offered a commentary on an ethical analysis I co-authored with Julian Savulescu on the use of semaglutide-based weight-loss drugs such as Ozempic. In this response, I continue the discussion by engaging their concerns about the narrow framing of our analysis with respect to the structural determinants of health and the conditions of autonomy, as well as the role of race, class and gender in shaping stigma and access to treatment. I argue that Räsänen and Ahola-Launonen's critique and the conclusion they draw are largely in alignment with our paper and that the absence in our account of a more expansive conception of autonomy and a broader discussion of race, class and gender are fair criticisms. In what follows, I add nuance to these dimensions and caution against critiques of unjust structures that risk reproducing injustice by inadvertently denying the agency, self-respect and inclusion of marginalised groups.

Journal of Medical EthicsVol. 52(3)
National University of Singapore (SG), National University Heart Centre Singapore (SG)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Ethics in medical practice
2.82
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.