"Pawzempic" in the Pipeline: Why Are We Designing Weight Drugs for Dogs?
Headlines make it sound inevitable: “Ozempic for pets,” “weight-loss shots for dogs,” “Pawzempic.” In reality, that future is not yet here, it’s in development. Pharmaceutical companies and supplement makers are exploring GLP-1-style approaches for companion animals, and some products that claim to mimic GLP-1 effects (fibres, resistant starches, pre/probiotics) are already being marketed. Clinical research and trials are underway in various places, but these drugs are not a definitive reality the way human GLP-1 drugs have become.
That makes this moment incredibly important and urgent. Before we normalise medicating appetite in animals, we need to ask a deeper and more provocative question:
Why are we creating these solutions for problems that are largely human made?
What these drugs would do and what they wouldn’t
GLP-1 agonists work by mimicking a hormone that increases feelings of fullness and slows digestion. In humans they can reduce appetite and help with weight loss. The idea for dogs is similar: reduce hunger, curb begging, make it easier for guardians to manage calories.
But a drug that reduces appetite doesn’t change the broader environment and the core issue: the processed diets sold at scale, the social rituals that reward begging behaviours, the lack of outlets for dogs to have natural movement and express natural behaviours, or the economic and cultural forces that shape how we think about care. Medicating our dogs’ appetites only treats a visible symptom, not the very systems that produced the problem.
Dogs don’t don’t feed themselves, people do
Here’s the harsh truth: dogs don’t choose their food, their portion sizes, or even their schedules. Guardians do. This changes the conversation entirely. When a dog gains weight, the immediate cause may be overeating, but the root causes are located a bit further upstream: marketing of food and other products that we buy for them, our own human habits and projections like going for a cappuccino and puppuccino, home environments that are out of alignment with our dogs’ needs, and sometimes medical issues.
It’s not enough to ask, “Will this drug reduce a dog’s appetite?” We also need to ask, “What will giving this drug help us, as guardians, avoid looking at?” such as our poor food choices, not providing our dogs with enough opportunities for movement and stimulation, and how we so often use food and treats as a form of affection.
The weight we bred into them
There’s another layer of the issue that need to be addressed: genetics and our selective breeding. For decades we selected dogs for traits that made them easier to work with and train. That often meant selecting for high food motivation. A reliable “food drive” made dogs more trainable. In some breeds, that selection meant concentrations of genes linked to appetite and weight regulation.
So, when an energetic, food-driven Labrador begs and gains weight in a modern home, we’re not seeing a “greedy” dog. We’re seeing a predictable expression of traits that we humans selected and amplified. This recognition shifts the responsibility back to people, to our breeding choices, to how we design and regulate a dog’s life, and to the systems that make processed kibble and calorie-dense treats the default in how we feed our dogs.
Microbiome, metabolism and the real biology of weight
Research continues to show that the gut microbiome plays a major role in appetite regulation, inflammation, and fat storage. Obese dogs often show lower microbial diversity and different metabolic signalling. We also know that diet changes can help restore microbiome balance and improve metabolic markers.
This matters because it points toward solutions that get to the root of the problem: better, species-appropriate nutrition, food diversity, and targeted approaches that support gut health instead of just trying to stunt the dog’s appetite.
The industry question: who benefits?
We also have to acknowledge the elephant in the room and look at who benefits from a doggy weight loss drug. Pharmaceutical and supplement markets see billions in potential revenue if pet obesity can be “treated” with pills, injections, or specialised supplements. Marketing that promises quick solutions taps into guardians’ guilt, shame, and our very human desire to fix things fast with a silver bullet. The problem and risk with this approach is that is that we are normalising relying upon the very industry that created the problem to hand us a solution (for a price, of course), instead of addressing the environmental and social causes of the problem itself.
What stewardship looks like instead
If the goal is healthier dogs, not simply smaller appetites, we have to take a systems approach:
Food first. “F” for fresh food is the foundation of our FETCH acronym for a reason. We need to move toward fresh, nutrient-dense, minimally processed food options that support microbiome health, help our dogs feel full, and importantly, satisfy their biological and emotional needs.
Microbiome support. Gut health is key to overall health. We need to ensure we are providing our dogs with a variety of fibres and appropriate prebiotics, as the foundation of gut health.
Enrichment as movement. A refocussing on sniff walks, foraging, play, and natural movement instead of calorie-counting as the primary “fix.”
Change reinforcement culture. Use play, scent, and social contact as rewards, not always food.
Check for potential underlying medical issues. Thyroid problems, steroids use, and other medications can impact weight. This is where diagnostics matter.
Address breeding and our wider systems around dog culture. Breed selection, the commercial food industry, and even urban design practices are part of shaping the problem, so they need to be brought into the conversation around how we help our dogs stay fit and healthy.
A final, harder question
We can make pills, powders, and new products. We can run clinical trials and market solutions. But perhaps the more useful question is this:
What does it say about us if we create medications to manage the consequences of our choices, rather than making different choices and bucking the systems that make us and our dogs sick in the first place?
This is not an argument against all medical tools and interventions. There are certainly times when targeted pharmaceuticals can really help individual animals. But as a public health or cultural response, turning towards appetite suppression instead of getting to the root of the problem risks becoming a band-aid for our much larger failure of stewardship.
If this unsettled you, good. That discomfort is useful. If you want to go deeper, listen to our September podcast episode, where we unpack the ethics, the science, and practical alternatives. Join the conversation, leave a comment, or come to our next community Zoom to ask questions and share what you’re noticing in your life with dogs.
Listen here - “Pawzempic, Puppuccino Culture & the Weight of Responsibility”
And if you want to continue the conversation, join our FETCH First Light Community here.
Dr Alexia Mellor & Stacey Renphrey - FETCH Founders