Aren't most of the health benefits they list in the article the benefits (or reversing the impacts) of a healthier metabolic system? Apnea, fatty liver, and cancer risk are all linked to obesity.

I know there are other positive side-effects of GLP-1s, but those are not necessarily beneficial to most people. For example, much of the side-benefits are things like reduced addiction, smoking, drugs, alcohol. If you don't have an addiction, do you need addiction medication?

My personal belief's get in the way here as I think the methods we use to define dosage of pharmaceuticals and therapeutics is antiquated. We essentially titrate to the point where we see negative side-effects and then back off.

So before we can go to the "should everyone be taking GLP-1s", I think we need to be looking at "how much would benefit this person at this exact moment". The answer may be zero.

Is anyone actively working on this? (not just for GLP-1s).

I work in neurotech developing closed-loop neurostimulations, we only stimulate what we can measure and when we are looking for a specific response from that individual. I believe this is the future of medicine beyond just neurostimulation.