285
Maybe the airlines will subsidize weight loss drugs...
This is going to be the weirdest perk for getting gold status on an airline's frequent flyer program.
That's exactly why so many companies push employee assistance programs for mental health crisis and weight loss. They don't care if you actually get better, so long as it make you more profitable to them.
But it always does.
If we actually cared about profit, we would have 3 day work weeks, plenty of vacation days, free child care, free housing and basic food staples.
And the profits would break the sky.
But it's more about control and making poors miserable than about absolute profits.
If the medications result in a society that is 10% slimmer, total passenger weight across flights would fall by about 2%.
That reduction would translate into roughly 1.5% fuel savings for airlines and a projected 4% increase in earnings per share, according to the analysis.
It's quite sad that the conclusion is more profit for shareholders.
Why do you hate capitalism?!? (/s)
Proportionately lower the bag fees as a thank-you and we’ll talk.
No they won't. Airlines will reduce seating space so they can cram even more cattle into the tube. That's "business" 101.
That would save them even more fuel costs.
10 20lb chunks is 200lbs. 20 10lb chunks is 200 lbs. ???
True, fuel cost would be the same per flight, but maybe Corkyskog is getting at the airline still coming out ahead with more seats since they would sell more tickets.
Overall that would mean less flights needed to move the same number of people so it arguably does reduce fuel cost in a sense.
(This assumes that people physically take up less space as they lose weight, which, I guess for dimensions like legroom, maybe isn’t the case)
The devil is always in the details. Good analysis.
- here, take these ʕっ•ᴥ•ʔっ kg, g, m, cm
- two tickets
Well, that would reduce the emissions emmited per person though!
Why don't airlines charge for the combined weight of the passenger plus their luggage?
Because that's a terrible idea lmao
Very illegal
Hmm...if someone spills over onto someone else's seat, they should have to pay for a second ticket though...
Blame the airline for seats that are too small, not passengers for being too large.
If they cant fit into one seat, then yes the airline can require they buy two.
Because the overhead of weighing passengers and their luggage for every flight would completely wreck the logistics and make it both unpleasant to fly and unprofitable to operate.
Imagine the fuel cost savings if politicians would arrive in the 21. century and use more video call.
Imagine the airline fuel savings after gangrenous amputations.
I saw this in the Dutch news two days ago and almost started looking for an English-language article to post here - but i figured someone else will do it sooner than later lol. But great news though, also for the climate ;).
Cynicism about the airline industry aside, I'd like to see how much CO2 this could prevent. Probably simple to calculate if you know how much jet fuel costs and how much CO2 it produces.
Not just jet fuel, but also savings in food production, which is a major producer of co2
The US has always had a different fuel calculation for aircraft because of so many body positive passengers. There is even a different calculation flying the same route from the US than to the US.
FAA standard person is 170lbs/77kg. I'm sure the airlines use a better estimate though.
It won't reduce jet fuel. It just means commercial planes can carry more cargo.
Excellent point! But then wouldn't that mean fewer cargo planes? So still less fuel overall even if not on a per-plane basis.
Micro economics: Price will reduce to maximize utilization
The world we know: reduction in cost means increased profits we can funnel directly into fuel for the CEO'S private jet and super yachts.
Carbon isn't considered a cost by the wealthy and powerful.
For a few months right? I read that ozempic users often go back to their weight since they never changed their habits.
No, the drug changes the habits. It quiets down food noise in the brain (not always thinking about food), and shifts people's tastes/preferences in food. It doesn't change how the body processes food, it changes how the brain wants food. So the habits change pretty quickly.
I know people taking it.
No it doesnt change habits. It makes them eat less which they even can ignore. And off it or on it they eat the same things and complain about the stomach aches.
It makes them eat less which they even can ignore
What are you talking about? If they're eating less, then it's working at changing the behavior. What is there to "ignore" at that point?
Because it only reduces hunger. They can ignore that they don't feel hungry and keep eating.
Also eating less for a period of time because you don't feel hunger then returning the feelings of hunger does not change behavior in long term.
Capitalism cost a lot 🤷♀️
this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
285 points (100.0% liked)
Not The Onion
21253 readers
1563 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS