Is this another instance of rushing a drug into production before finding out if it has dangerous side effects? Probably, after all, we have past examples of the same thing happening with phen-fen and Vioxx, just to name two.
And everyone "knows" that it's much better to suffer with any/all side effects/complications of anything that will make fat people thin because being fat is a fate worse than death, right? Right? Sorry, I'd rather be fat and as healthy as I can be with the problems I have (yeah, I know, hindsight is 20/20 and if I knew 11 years ago what I know now about WLS, I never would have done that either) than take whatever pill the doctors/pharmaceutical companies are pushing today to make me thin, simply because those pharmaceutical companies don't actually give a rat's ass if I have quality of life as long as they get my dollars for every so-called "cure" they have for being fat (and as successful as they've been in the past, I really don't think they're going to come up with anything better any time soon). After all, if their pills cause damage to your body in any way, they can sell you more pills to take care of that too, and make even more money off you. No thank you.
But of course, according to them, liver damage isn't caused by taking Alli/Xenical. After all, if fat people didn't take these drugs, they'd end up with liver damage anyway simply because being fat causes liver damage (in their opinion, and you know what they say about opinions). I want to see the studies showing that fat people who haven't taken orlistat in any form end up with liver damage in the same or greater numbers than fat people who have taken orlistat. Somehow, I don't think there's a study out there that shows that (I wonder why that is? Hmmmmm...........).
So, for my money, if a diet or a pill promises results that sound too good to be true, those results are probably unattainable by the majority of fat people, and should be taken with the whole of the Bonneville Salt Flats.