zlacker

[return to "Ozempic is changing the foods Americans buy"]
1. helsin+89[view] [source] 2026-01-12 13:20:14
>>giulio+(OP)
Yet they seem to be spending more in restaurants:

> Ozempic Users Actually Spend More Dining Out.

> ..In casual dining establishments, they spend 25% more than non-GLP-1 households do, the market researcher says. Data firm Numerator shares similar findings, noting that while GLP-1 users report eating out less and cooking at home more, their spending says otherwise: “Verified purchase data reveals that their fast-food buy rate is up 2%.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-02/ozempic-g... (archive: https://archive.ph/V6Erv)

◧◩
2. quesom+qp2[view] [source] 2026-01-13 02:46:52
>>helsin+89
Not GLP-1, but moved onto an OMAD diet which is essentially a 23hr daily fast with nothing but neat espresso, cigarettes and water in between - although occasionally I have a small treat or sugary drink.

But now I eat almost exclusively at restaurants and enjoy it, and overall it's cheaper than cooking at home given wastage with many ingredients and desire for variety.

I do eat very simply though, usually south & east asian food.

◧◩◪
3. driveb+Fp2[view] [source] 2026-01-13 02:49:04
>>quesom+qp2
How can eating at a restaurant be cheaper than at home? Could you give examples?
◧◩◪◨
4. bee_ri+Yz2[view] [source] 2026-01-13 04:58:42
>>driveb+Fp2
Others have given specific examples, but in general it seems like a weird thing that eating out is almost always more expensive than cooking in. You’ve got a place run by professionals, and they can prepare the meals in bulk, overall it should be possible to run it cheaper than an individual. But that would be more like a cafeteria type situation than the super-customized experience we usually get…
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. zmgsab+0E2[view] [source] 2026-01-13 05:54:48
>>bee_ri+Yz2
That’s because home labor and quality often aren’t priced in:

- a chef is faster

- a chef will produce better quality

- but a chef charges for their time

A restaurant often is paying half the price to ingredients and half to overhead; which means you can get it “cheaper” despite paying more for ingredients — since 150% as much on ingredients is still only 75% cost, once you don’t count personal overhead.

You need a lot of efficiency on the professional side to offset that cook time and kitchen space are “free” on the home side of the equation.

[go to top]