As anti-obesity medications like Ozempic and Wegovy become increasingly popular, American employees are making career choices based on access to them. A recent poll found that 1 in 5 Americans would be willing to switch jobs to get insurance coverage for these in-demand medications. But as the craze for GLP-1 drugs takes hold of the workforce, the question is—are we becoming a healthier society, or merely taking a medically approved shortcut?

In a world where job benefits such as remote work, unlimited time off, and child care allowances drive the benefits discussion, there's a new player in the mix: weight loss drugs. A 2024 survey by 9amHealth found that 67% of Americans would remain at a job they disliked if it included retaining access to drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy. And if workplaces don't pay for them? 20% of respondents would actively seek another job.

This behavior is not without purpose. Out-of-pocket expenses for GLP-1 medications such as Ozempic can run over $1,000 monthly. Confronted with this expense, some users report skimping on necessities such as food and entertainment in order to pay for their monthly supply. Coverage under employer-sponsored insurance, thus, becomes not only a benefit—but a necessity.

What is the Frenzy of GLP-1 Drugs?

Contrary to older weight loss drugs that normally achieve a 5% drop in body weight, newer GLP-1 medications provide up to 20% weight loss or more. Their impact has been so significant that Science identified GLP-1 medications as the 2023 "Breakthrough of the Year." The medications act by emulating a hormone that controls blood glucose and hunger, leading to both enhanced metabolic function and reduced hunger.

Initially approved for type 2 diabetes, Ozempic and other medications such as Mounjaro have been used extensively off-label for weight loss, driving stratospheric demand. In February 2023 alone, over 373,000 prescriptions for Ozempic were filled—a 111% increase from the year before.

Ozempic: High Demand, Higher Costs, and Potential Misuse

But with increasing demand comes increasing expense. Ozempic and Mounjaro were among 800 drugs that experienced a median list price increase of 4.5% this year, the Wall Street Journal reported. Some large institutions, such as Ascension Health and the University of Texas System, have even withdrawn coverage in light of skyrocketing prices—reporting a 233% increase in expenditures related to them.

According to the World Health Organization, over 80% of people with type 2 diabetes are overweight or obese. Chronic inflammation caused by excess fat, especially visceral fat, disrupts how insulin functions. Additionally, high levels of circulating fatty acids can impair insulin sensitivity.

Dr. Arush Sabharwal, Bariatric & Metabolic Surgeon explains, "This is where GLP-1 receptor agonists like Ozempic (semaglutide) come into the picture. Originally approved for type 2 diabetes, Ozempic also promotes weight loss by suppressing appetite and slowing gastric emptying. Clinical trials have shown significant weight reduction and improved blood sugar control in patients using it."

"Though Ozempic is not a magic solution, still it denotes a powerful association between the role of weight management and type 2 diabetes. For those who are overweight, lifestyle modifications are important, after seeking professional advice from a weight loss expert like a doctor/bariatric surgeon/certified nutritionist."

There's also an increasing worry about the abuse and stigma surrounding these medications. Although Ozempic is now a cultural buzzword and an alleged "magic bullet" for rapid weight loss, physicians warn that it's not a sustainable solution in and of itself. "Without robust support for behavior change, weight loss is generally short-term and tends to be followed by weight regain," experts in endocrinology and metabolic care stated.

In fact, 38% of respondents to the 9amHealth poll confessed to exploring black market sources prior to settling on FDA-accepted treatments—courageous behavior that reveals the desperation and lack of education about obesity management.

Why Obesity is an Expensive, Long-Term Health Problem Employers Can't Dismiss?

Over 40% of American adults qualify for the CDC's definition of obesity, a BMI of 30 or more. The disorder is a significant cause of comorbidities such as type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease—a combination frequently called "cardiodiabesity." Alone, obesity costs the U.S. healthcare system $173 billion per year and accounts for $6.38 billion in lost productivity in the workplace.

With these daunting numbers, employers are finally realizing that managing obesity up front may be cheaper in the long term. In 2023, only 25% of employers were covering GLP-1s, but this might increase to 43% in 2024, says health consulting company Accolade.

But selling prescription medications without complementing them with health support is a lost chance. Specialists recommend a combined approach—of accessible pharmaceuticals along with dietary advice, exercise routine, psychiatric help, and regular medical follow-up.

Medical Experts Call for Balanced Approach

While the temptation of GLP-1 medications can be tempting, specialists advise against its use as a single solution. Pills can trigger weight loss, but long-term health is derived from behavioral modification. Fitch and others suggest addressing obesity as any chronic illness, with long-term, multidimensional management.

Dr. Arush emphasises, "There is a strong connecting link between type 2 diabetes and obesity. When there is excess deposition of abdominal fat, it makes the body insulin resistant. This is a condition wherein the body finds it hard to respond to insulin hormone and this in turn, surges the blood sugar levels. Ultimately this makes the body predisposed to type 2 diabetes."

Employers who are seriously interested in tackling obesity in the workplace need to look beyond providing coverage. They must make available comprehensive health packages that consist of individualized interventions, ongoing tracking, and lifestyle change support systems for enduring change.

For the time being, it appears GLP-1 medications are not only changing waistlines, but also workplaces. Workers are willing to make drastic life adjustments—including job-hopping—for access to these drugs. Whether this is a significant shift in corporate healthcare priorities or a troubling shortcut remains to be determined.

One thing is certain, the workplace is emerging as a central front in the battle against obesity. And as the stakes grow higher, so does the onus on employers to provide intelligent, sustainable, and equitable solutions for the long-term health of their employees.

Dr. Arush Sabharwal is a Bariatric & Metabolic Surgeon at SCOD Clinic in India

Delhi-NCR is witnessing a sharp increase in seasonal influenza, with 1,777 confirmed H1N1 (swine flu) cases reported out of 2,392 total Influenza A cases.

According to data from the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC), the corresponding period last year recorded just 229 H1N1 cases.

Several hospitals in the national capital have reported a significant increase in cases. However, so far there have been no reports of patients requiring ICU care or ventilator support.

“Delhi is fully prepared to deal with the present health situation. There is no shortage of beds, doctors, medicines or essential medical equipment, and every patient will receive timely and appropriate treatment,” health authorities said.

Is The H1N1 Surge Due To A New Strain?

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has confirmed that the current surge is not due to a new strain of H1N1 and has advised people to follow precautions rather than panic, PTI reported.

According to the apex research body, the Influenza A (H1N1) viruses currently circulating in India belong to the A/Missouri/11/2025 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus strain.

“These viruses belong to clade 6B.1A.5a2a, subclade D.3.1.1, and have been in circulation since 2025,” the ICMR said. “Seasonal influenza, including H1N1, is mostly self-limiting,” it added.

Is The Current H1N1 Strain Covered By The Flu Vaccine?

The ICMR said the influenza strains currently circulating in India are well matched with the vaccine strains recommended for the Northern Hemisphere.

For both egg-based vaccines and cell culture-, recombinant protein- or nucleic acid-based vaccines, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends an A/Missouri/11/2025 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus.

HealthandMe spoke to experts to understand whether people should consider getting a flu vaccine amid the current rise in H1N1 cases and who should prioritise vaccination.

Doctors stressed that annual influenza vaccination remains an important tool to reduce the risk of severe illness, complications and hospitalization, particularly among people at higher risk.

“Since the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, H1N1 is no longer given as a separate standalone vaccine. The H1N1 strain is included in the regular seasonal influenza vaccine, whether trivalent or quadrivalent. Therefore, getting the recommended annual flu vaccine also protects against H1N1,” Dr Tushar Tayal, Associate Director, Internal Medicine, CK Birla Hospital, Gurugram, told HealthandMe.

Who Should Prioritize Flu Vaccination?

The seasonal influenza vaccine is recommended every year for everyone aged six months and above. Doctors say vaccination is particularly important for:

• Pregnant women
• Older adults
• Young children
• Healthcare workers
• People with diabetes
• People with asthma
• People with heart disease

The Indian Medical Association (IMA) advises that the inactivated influenza vaccine can be given to the above high-risk groups.

“The live attenuated influenza vaccine (intranasal spray) can be given only to persons aged 2-49 years (not to pregnant females),” as per the IMA.

“The H1N1 flu vaccine is typically administered annually before flu season, around October, as a single intramuscular dose at clinics, pharmacies or hospitals,” Dr Atul Gogia, Head, Infectious Diseases, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, told HealthandMe.

For most adults and children aged over nine years, one dose each year is sufficient. However, children aged six months to eight years who are receiving the flu vaccine for the first time may require two doses at least four weeks apart. After the initial vaccination, one annual dose is generally sufficient.

Should You Get The Flu Vaccine Now?

In India, influenza vaccination is ideally taken ahead of periods when flu activity tends to increase, particularly during the monsoon and winter months. The vaccine is available through hospitals, clinics and vaccination centers.

With H1N1 cases currently rising in Delhi-NCR, people who fall into high-risk groups may particularly benefit from discussing vaccination with their doctor.

Can The Flu Vaccine Prevent H1N1 Completely?

“While the shot drastically reduces hospitalizations and complications, its primary limitation is that it does not offer 100% protection against infection, nor does it cover non-influenza viruses. However, even if contracted, vaccination significantly softens the disease’s severity,” Dr Atul said.

Dr Tayal also explained that vaccine effectiveness can vary from season to season, depending on how well the vaccine strains match the influenza viruses circulating at the time.

Why Is Annual Flu Vaccination Needed?

According to Dr Tayal, annual vaccination can reduce the risk of severe influenza, complications, hospitalization and flu-related deaths. However, it does not provide complete protection against every respiratory infection.

The flu vaccine protects against influenza viruses, including H1N1, but does not prevent illnesses caused by other viruses or bacteria.

Along with annual vaccination, experts advised people to:

• Maintain good hand hygiene
• Follow respiratory etiquette, including covering the mouth and nose when coughing or sneezing
• Stay home when unwell
• Avoid close contact with others when experiencing flu-like symptoms

Higher education has changed far more than we often acknowledge. Universities are no longer simply places where students earn degrees. They are where young adults spend some of the most formative years of their lives, away from familiar support systems, making independent decisions, navigating uncertainty and, for many, encountering the first signs of a mental health condition. That quiet shift has expanded the role of educational institutions in ways that were never envisaged a decade ago.

The conversation around student wellbeing has evolved alongside this change. Mental health is no longer viewed as a subject to be discussed only after a crisis. Students are speaking more openly, parents are asking different questions, faculty members are becoming more aware and institutions are recognising that emotional wellbeing is closely linked to learning, participation and long term outcomes. This change deserves to be welcomed because it has helped move mental health from the margins of campus life to the centre of institutional responsibility.

Why A Counsellor Alone Is Not Enough?

Yet one assumption continues to shape much of this conversation. The presence of a counsellor is often seen as evidence that a campus is equipped to support student mental health. Counsellors remain indispensable and, for many students, they provide exactly the support that is needed. The challenge arises when counselling is expected to fulfil every role within a mental healthcare system.

Every effective healthcare system is built on layers of expertise. A physician does not replace a surgeon. A laboratory does not replace a diagnosis. Emergency care does not replace rehabilitation. Mental healthcare should be viewed no differently. Counselling is often the first point of contact, but the needs of students do not end there.

Some require structured therapy, others psychiatric evaluation, some ongoing clinical monitoring, and a few immediate crisis intervention. A mature campus mental healthcare system should be equipped to respond across this entire spectrum. The conversation should therefore move beyond whether campuses have counsellors to whether they have a system capable of supporting every stage of care.

Also read: Why People With Mental Health Conditions Are More Likely To Struggle With Tobacco Addiction

Building A Comprehensive Campus Mental Healthcare System

Encouragingly, public policy is beginning to recognise this changing reality. The University Grants Commission’s draft guidelines on mental health and wellbeing for higher educational institutions, with recommendations on counsellor ratios, dedicated wellbeing centres, round the clock helplines and mechanisms for early identification of distress, mark an important step in strengthening institutional support. More importantly, they open the door to a broader conversation on what comprehensive mental healthcare within higher education should look like over the coming years.

Building such a system requires looking beyond individual appointments. One of the most valuable lessons from developing healthcare services is that outcomes are rarely determined by the first consultation alone. They depend on how seamlessly care continues afterwards. If a counsellor recognises that a student needs specialised assessment, how quickly can that happen?

Also read: Lindsay Clancy Trial: What Postpartum Psychosis Really Looks Like, From A Survivor

If medication becomes necessary, is psychiatric care available without delay? If a student experiences a crisis outside campus hours, is there a clearly defined pathway to immediate support? If treatment begins, who ensures continuity during semester breaks or after the student returns home? These are not administrative questions. They are questions that shape recovery.

A comprehensive campus mental healthcare ecosystem should therefore bring together different levels of expertise rather than rely on one profession alone. Counsellors, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, experienced mental health specialists and emergency support services each play a distinct role. Their contribution becomes most effective when they work as part of an integrated network with clear referral pathways, shared clinical responsibility and continuity of care that extends beyond the physical boundaries of the campus.

Prevention And Early Intervention Matter Too

Also read: Sugar Rationing In First 1,000 Days Linked To Lower Depression, Cancer Risk In Adulthood

Equally important is recognising that mental healthcare should not begin only after a student seeks help. Institutions have long understood the value of preventive healthcare through regular physical health assessments, vaccination drives and awareness programmes. Mental health deserves the same thoughtful approach.

Periodic, voluntary mental health check ins, appropriate screening, trained faculty and peer support networks, backed by specialist expertise, can help identify concerns early while respecting privacy, dignity and informed consent. Early recognition is not about labelling students. It is about ensuring that support reaches them before distress becomes disabling.

Technology can strengthen this ecosystem, but it cannot replace it. Digital consultations, secure follow up, coordinated records and access to specialists across locations can make care more continuous, particularly for students studying away from home. Their real value lies in connecting different parts of the system rather than functioning as isolated solutions.

Mental Healthcare As Part Of The Institutional Foundation

The quality of a university has traditionally been measured through its academic standards, faculty and research. Increasingly, it will also be measured by how well it supports the people who make learning possible. Mental healthcare deserves to be seen as part of that institutional foundation, not as an additional welfare service that sits alongside education.

The conversation has already moved beyond whether student mental health matters. The next step is to recognise that no single professional, however skilled, can meet every need that students may bring with them. Every campus needs more than a counsellor because every student deserves access to a mental healthcare system that is prepared not only to listen, but also to respond, support and care through every stage of that journey.

By Dr. Jothi Neeraja, Founder, Chairwoman and Managing Director, Maarga Mindcare

Anxiety and depression are major concerns in adulthood, but could nutrition during the earliest stages of life influence health decades later? Two new studies suggest that lower sugar exposure during the first 1,000 days of life may be associated with lower risks of anxiety, depression and even several cancers later in life.

The findings, from studies published in Translational Psychiatry and PNAS point to the potential long-term effects of early-life nutrition. However, the findings do not mean that restricting sugar in infancy directly prevents these diseases.

Sugar Rationing And Mental Health

A 2026 study led by researchers from the University of Surrey, UK, analyzed 46,448 people born between October 1951 and March 1956.

Participants were grouped according to how long they were exposed to sugar rationing: from in utero only to 24 months. People conceived after food rationing had ended served as the main comparison group.

Researchers also analyzed brain MRI data from 5,990 participants.

Lower Risk Of Anxiety And Depression

Compared with people conceived after rationing ended, those exposed to sugar rationing for the three longest periods had significantly lower hazards of both anxiety and depression.

• Shorter-exposure groups did not show significant differences.
• The associations were stronger in women.
• Adult sugar intake was broadly similar across groups, at about 58–59 g/day of free sugar and 122–124 g/day of total sugar.

When later-life sugar intake was considered, the association with anxiety persisted among those exposed throughout pregnancy and the first two years of life, while the association with depression weakened and was no longer statistically significant.

Further, MRI analysis found differences across rationing groups in 80 of 139 gray matter regions. Analysis identified 11 regions that differed from participants conceived immediately after rationing ended, including the brainstem, occipital fusiform gyrus and several cerebellar regions.

Sugar And Cancer Risk

A separate study published in PNAS examined whether sugar exposure during the first 1,000 days could influence cancer risk later in life.

Researchers from China Agricultural University and the University of Cambridge used the abrupt end of UK sugar rationing in September 1953 as a natural experiment. The analysis included 64,761 UK Biobank participants born between 1951 and 1956.

Compared with those whose first 1,000 days were not affected by rationing, participants exposed to rationing showed lower incidence of several cancers:

• Liver/intrahepatic bile duct cancer: 69% lower
• Prostate cancer: 52% lower
• Lung cancer: 41% lower
• Rectal cancer: 40% lower
• Breast cancer: 36% lower

The researchers identified two possible pathways behind the association.

How Could Early Sugar Exposure Matter?

• Long-term dietary habits: People exposed to rationing consumed less sugar, ate smaller quantities and had healthier, more diverse diets even five decades later, suggesting that early-life exposure may influence lasting food preferences.

• Biological ageing: The rationed groups had longer leukocyte telomeres, equivalent to about 2.2 fewer years of biological ageing, along with lower levels of Granzyme B, a marker linked to chronic immune activation.

Sugar's Link With Mental Health And Cancer

Sugar is an important source of energy for the brain, and very low blood glucose can impair brain function. However, excess sugar intake has also been associated with metabolic problems that can affect long-term health.

When it comes to cancer, sugar does not directly cause cancer, and cutting out all sugar does not “starve” cancer cells. Both healthy and cancer cells use glucose for energy.

However, consistently consuming excessive amounts of added sugar can contribute to weight gain and obesity, which are established risk factors for several cancers.