That weight-loss drugs have become a “ploy”-especially among celebrities-to shed pounds more or less quickly is now common knowledge. However, we are not here to make moral or health speeches, for that there are doctors, with whom it is always right to confront before taking any kind of drug. We are here for the data: according to a study published by UCL in January 2026, 1.6 million adults in the United Kingdom have used weight-loss drugs in the last year; in the United States, according to a study by RAND, this would be 12 percent of the population; while in Italy, the last available data dates back to 2024, when, according to Aifa, semaglutide and liraglutide – GLP-1 drugs initially developed for the treatment of diabetes – reached more than 300,000 estimated packages on sale. Numbers that reflect the growing trend of people who have already used or are considering using GLP-1 drugs.
Regardless of the data, the proof is easier to find in front of our eyes: just look at how many celebrities are showing up in recent months with slimmer silhouettes and bodies that don’t need too much explicit confirmation to show an obvious change. And we reiterate: this is not about judging or drawing hasty conclusions, but taking note of an increasingly visible phenomenon. Namely, that what happens on the red carpets seems to have a ripple effect even far from Hollywood, all the way to the clothing stores. As CNBC reports, the so-called Ozempic effect is already reportedly changing the way sizes circulate in the fashion market. Several second-hand operators in the United States, for example, have told of noticing a distinct change: more and more plus-size garments are ending up in thrift stores, while at the same time the demand for smaller sizes is growing.
Other retailers and industry entrepreneurs are also observing similar dynamics, with customers changing size more frequently and revamping their wardrobes more often, following the different stages of weight loss. Indeed, it is not just about changing size but also about changing one’s style, choosing tighter and bolder clothes, and it was industry executives and consumers themselves who shared this observation with the Wall Street Journal. This does not mean, at least for now, that brands are officially cutting back on larger sizes, but that they are certainly facing a more “dynamic” demand, with customers changing sizes more and more often.
And this significant change in size demand, which is also coupled with an increase in returns in the United States, could generate up to $5 billion in margin risk. This was revealed in an analysis by Impact Analytics, which found that demand for larger sizes (L, XL, XXL) has declined, while sales of smaller sizes are growing-a trend that could leave up to 400 million garments misaligned with consumer demand by 2027, should it accelerate. Some brands have already faced this phenomenon: Lululemon CEO Calvin McDonald, for example, has attributed a lack of availability of some smaller sizes (as well as an overly limited color palette in the main leggings category) as one of the reasons for Lululemon’s slower growth in the United States in the first quarter of 2024. And indeed the shift in production has already begun: while traditionally most brands used a 1-2-2-1 ordering model-stocking one part S, two parts M, two parts L, and one part XL-they are now increasingly adopting a 2-2-1-1 model and reviewing sizing strategies every six months instead of annually.
