If the friends of friends are taking weightloss jabs they wouldn't want burgers, so I'd take that with a pinch of salt.
I don't understand why there are so many comments (in general, not just on here) about how weight loss should take place 'the hard way', as though there is a moral element to it all. Some people are doubtless overweight because of gluttony and/or sloth, but others have medical conditions or metabolic reasons for carrying excess fat.
The NHS treats people for infertility, skiing accidents and other sports injuries, alcoholism and smoking cessation (as well as alcohol-related liver disease and smoking-related illness such as COPD and cancer) and so on - all of those things are lifestyle choices, and there are numerous other examples. Why is obesity always singled out as a waste of money?
Should people who get stomach cancer because they eat cured meats or skin cancer from sunbathing be expected to fund their own treatment? Or those with diet-related diabetes? Where does it stop? What about those who are unable to pay for treatment? Do they get treated free and others not? Who decides which patients are 'deserving' and which are not?
I understand that the jabs are being phased in, which is why the criteria for acceptance are so tight, but IMO putting a number on the BMI required to get them free will encourage people to gain the extra weight. If someone has a BMI of 38, and upping it to 40 would mean they could get it down to 25 or so, I can see why they might reach for the ice cream. In principle, I am in favour of the jabs being available to those who want them, but I can see that there might be teething troubles until it that can happen.