GLP-1 in three charts: sticky adoption and what’s next

Published on July 13, 2026

We are entering summer time, but before that, it is also “report time”, with many great publications making an update on what has happened since the start of the year. And today, I’d like to focus on GLP-1, which, alongside the broader topic of healthy ageing, is the hottest thing agitating the food industry.

1 – GLP-1 adoption is still rising fast in the US… and users remain under treatment

Gallup recently published a survey on the share of US adults currently taking GLP-1 drugs for weight loss (excluding those using them for diabetes, which helps explain the slightly lower figure compared to other benchmarks). Adoption is still rising fast, with currently 11% of US adults under treatment, compared to 8% in 2025 and 3% in 2024.

To put that in context, this represents a massive rise from 7 to about 28M users in two years.

GLP-1-use-is-rising-in-the-us-DigitalFoodLab

 

Beyond these impressive figures, the most striking point for me on this graph is not the rise of users, which is not so much a surprise. It is the absence of a widening gap between those currently using GLP-1 and those who have ever used it. It grew from 3 to 4% between 2024 and 2026. This means that for the past two years, a large majority of users have remained under treatment:

  • This comes as a small surprise, as treatment adherence is often low and declining.
  • It also begins to address users’ willingness to remain under treatment over the long term.

One hypothesis could be that, unlike other treatments, notably preventive ones, consumers here see immediate results when they start using GLP-1 drugs (and also when they stop).

2 – GLP-1 macro effects are visible with a 9% decrease in adult obesity in the US

The US obesity rate has dropped from 39.9% in 2022 to 36.4% in 2026, a full 3.5-point decline in four years, after decades of almost uninterrupted increase. That’s a 9% decline in adult obesity in just four years, which translates to about 9M people.

GLP-1 adoption, however, is not affecting diabetes prevalence, which continues to rise. There is probably a delayed effect here: weight can change very quickly, but its effects on overall health, and more specifically on diabetes, persist. We could, however, expect a decrease in diabetes in the next decade.

 

Obesity-is-declining-in-the-US-DigitalFoodLab

3 – GLP-1 beyond the US: a similar pattern

We’ve flagged this before, but it’s worth repeating: the UK, several EU countries, and a growing list of national health systems are moving toward reimbursement or subsidised access for GLP-1 drugs.

This will push penetration well beyond the “wealthy self-payer” segment that has driven adoption so far:

  • Of the 2.4 million British GLP-1 users in 2024, only 220,000 were doing so through the National Health Service (NHS).
  • France has become the first EU country to reimburse GLP-1 drugs this year. Also, 19 countries in Europe and Africa are using France’s price negotiations on medicines to determine their own reimbursement, which means many more users across these regions.
  • India, with its specific patent laws, now has generic versions of Ozempic available at prices as low as 14$/month.

The bottom line is that Europe is following the US with a 3-year gap and that Asia, notably India, is at an inflexion point.

4 – What’s next?

Beyond GLP-1 adoption and its impact on the food industry (fewer snacks, more protein, more fibre, more than 90% of consumers looking for dedicated products), we can wonder what the long-term impacts are.

A new survey is quite telling of how the use of GLP-1 injectable drugs is changing consumer perception: 75% of current GLP-1 injection users say they are “very comfortable” giving themselves a regular injection for their health or appearance, versus just ~30% among the general population.

GLP-1-users-and-their-willingness-to-inject-themselves-with-things

Once people cross the psychological barrier of self-injecting for health or appearance, they don’t seem to go back and are probably looking for more. That’s what we already pointed out in our insight on peptides (injectable proteins with unproven scientific effects on health, muscle gain, cognitive health, and appearance), which are becoming increasingly popular in the US.

GLP-1 has unleashed something much bigger than “just” a global weight-loss phenomenon. What it has really done is normalise self-injection as a routine health and appearance behaviour, not a medical exception. With 75% of users saying they have “no issue with needles,” the barrier that used to separate food, supplements, and pharma starts to dissolve. And that’s precisely the space peptides and other biologics are moving into, a space which will be very tough for the food industry to navigate. Food companies that keep watching GLP-1 as a simple “category disruption” problem may be missing the bigger picture: a slow loss of relevance in how people think about food and health.

You're in a good company

Join the 60+ clients of Digital FoodLab: leading agrifood companies, retailers, banks, investors, startups, and public organisations.

Use case: project for a global F&B company looking to map its AgTech innovation ecosystem and the best startups to partner with

What we did:

  • Mapping of the AgTech ecosystem: startups, research regulators, and other leading companies.
  • Discussion to select areas to focus on.
  • Analysis of the information to reveal the trends and a model to analyse eventual partners.
  • A workshop to validate the opportunities based on our recommendations.
  • Scouting of relevant partners followed by introductions.

Results:

  • Mapping the different categories of innovations in AgTech that should be considered now to create long-term benefits for the business.
  • Identification of key partners (an incubator and a couple of startups).

Use case: project for a CPG company on the healthy ageing ecosystem

What we did:

  • Education of the board through a couple of workshops to define the perimeter
  • Identification of key opportunities and threats created by long-term evolutions (technologies, business models, behavioural changes).
  • Deep dives on each of the priority categories.
  • Co-construction of a vision on how the company should address these challenges.
  • Identification of partners (startups, incubators, funds) to move forward.

Results:

  • Creating a consensus on which categories to prioritise and how to address them.
  • Implementation of an open innovation strategy through the development of partnerships.

Use case: project for a global CPG company to develop a strategy on the healthy ageing ecosystem

What we do (ongoing mission on a subscription model):

  • Kick-off where we present an overview of the AgriFoodTech ecosystem to select with the client the categories to cover and for each, the level of information required.
  • Monthly newsletter: each month we send a newsletter with the articles that we have gathered ranked by relevance, their summaries, and a layer of analysis.
  • Database: we set up a personalised database that will be filled month after month with the information gathered on the companies identified for the watch.
  • Workshops: twice a year with the client’s innovation team and other “innovation curious” team members, we present an overview of the evolutions, key trends and a dashboard of the topics followed by the watch.

Results:

  • A clear, regular and evolutive tool to follow what is happening in terms of innovation on key topics.
  • A forum (through the workshops) to discuss innovation trends and new opportunities.

Use case: opportunity screening for an ingredient company

What we did:

  • Kick-off to define the perimeter of the ecosystem studied.
  • Mapping of the different trends shaping the innovation ecosystem of the client.
  • Analysis of the trends on DigitalFoodLab’s trend curve and other relevant frameworks.
  • Workshop to discuss DigitalFoodLab’s recommendations on key trends to prioritise

Results:

  • Shared view of the innovation ecosystem for the client with a view of the trends to prioritize.
  • Clear document (personalised trend curve) that can be easily shared internaly to explain the company’s innovation choices and which can be then updated each year.

Use case: scouting for an agriculture coop

What we did:

  • Kick-off to define the perimeter of the client, the goals of the scouting (partnerships) and the criteria on which startups should be evaluated.
  • Set-up scouting: we selected the first batch of 20+ key startups following the criteria of the client.
  • On-going scouting: then we set up a quarterly scouting of about ten startups.
  • For each scouted startup, we created an ID card with key information such as the business and technological maturity, funding, and corporate partnerships. We also added an explanation of why we selected this startup.

Results:

  • An ongoing and evolutive scouting are matching the client's criteria and its capabilities in terms of deal flow.

Use case: working on an acquisition process for a CPG company

What we did:

  • Kick-off to define what the client is seeking, notably in terms of maturity.
  • Workshop with the client based on a mapping of the different innovation ecosystems adjacent to its activities to select some priorities and discuss inspiring examples of startup acquisition stories.
  • Identification of 20+ targets.
  • Workshop to select the most relevant to engage with.
  • DigitalFoodLab worked as a sparing partner during the acquisition process, notably to help design how the acquired startup could be integrated into the overall company’s strategy.

Results:

  • Different results from traditional M&A processes with a focus on the client’s innovation strategy.
  • Identification of a good match for an acquisition.

Use case: market due diligence on sugar alternatives

What we did:

  • Kick-off with the client to discuss its interest on this category, its expectations and existing level of information (notably on the target company).
  • Mapping of the ecosystem to analyse the different existing alternatives and technologies to compare them.
  • Interview (calls) with relevant startups made by our internal biotechnology expert.
  • Recommendation on whether to invest or not.

Results:

  • Clear view of the ecosystem and of the reasons to believe (or not) in each sub-category.
  • Enforceable recommendations based on facts and expertise.