Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

glp1digest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 640 posts

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#371

Post by ahartmetz »

saratogacx wrote: post #293
ahartmetz wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, auto-injectors, a curious piece of technology. I've always wondered how it is to actually use one since we had these in everyone's medkit in the German army, loaded with nerve agent antidotes. Just slam it on you leg and inject through the pants were the instructions... Kinda grisly, I guess it's less emotionally charged for a weight loss drug!

For drugs like these it isn't that different from a normal injection. The pen has about 4 doses in it so you twist it to set your dose. You attach a needle tip to the pen and give yourself a poke, press an inject button on the top and a spring loaded ratchet system pumps in the dose amount you set (making a wonderful ticking noise as it progresses). Pull out and toss the needle and put it back in the fridge for next…

Thanks!

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#372

Post by Sammi »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #224
mattmanser wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's often side effects, including nausea, diarrhea, headaches, bloating, discomfort, etc. As far as I can tell from forums, it's not like 5% have the side effects, it's like 80-90%. But for the first time in decades, I felt full. I didn't want to finish a meal, it was too much. My body regulated my food intake in what felt like a natural way. I hadn't even realized my body had somehow lost that fundamental mechan…

> As far as I can tell from forums, it's not like 5% have the side effects, it's like 80-90%. Happy people with no issues are less likely to post, or post as often. That said, much sympathy for the people who do experience particularly bad side effects.

Same with reviews. If sellers don't proactively ask for reviews from happy customers, then you're often only going to see negative reviews.

This must be an existing named bias, but my google foo is failing me.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#373

Post by stavros »

subscribed wrote: post #229
aetherson wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's under-commented upon because it's counterintuitive, but most people stop taking it. Like, two year continuation of use is about 25%. That's kinda wild, because it seems like holy shit if you're taking a drug that lets you drop 10-20% of your body weight from obese down to normal why would you stop taking it, but people do.

Because the pharmacy will refuse to sell it to you. Source: UK based friend who says the pharmacy will refuse to sell them once they fall under BMI 25 (still overweight). They'd prefer to be on the tiny maintenance dose but it seems to be very hard to achieve (unless you're going off the market completely).

I'll dispute that, I work for one of the online pharmacies and we won't stop selling it to you once you've reached BMI 25. We do have criteria to guard against sudden or extreme weight loss, but I think the BMI criterion for that is something like We'll also keep you on a small maintenance dose if you want, that's a conversation you'll have with your clinician and they'll judge whether it's medically appropriate. As far as I know, there's usually no reason to prevent you, though.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#374

Post by stavros »

refulgentis wrote: post #112
linsomniac wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's a miracle drug powerful enough to robustly lower people's all cause mortality Did I misread the article, my TL;DR of the article is that GLP-1 reduce the indicators or mortality without modifying the actual mortality (because most users return to normal indicators within about 2 years).

Subtly different: you read "most...return to normal...within 2 years", it says "When someone stops the medication , they'll [return to baseline]" Then from there, I click through the 65% #, assuming they have a good study on 65% of people stop after a year. Nah, they don't. It's super complex but tl;dr: specific cohort, and somehow the # getting on it in year 2 is higher than the # of people who quit in year 1. I hav…

I've been on GLP-1 for a month and my triglycerides halved, and my cholesterol dropped to the levels it was in my twenties. If that's not a predictor of lower mortality, there's something wrong with our fundamental medical knowledge.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#375

Post by stavros »

wincy wrote: post #342
gregw134 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unnoticable meaning doesn't have any effect at all, or just no bad side effects?

I’ve been on 15mg (the highest dose) of Zepbound for the past six months. As of right this second I’ve lost 74 pounds since September 2024 when I switched to Zepbound after having a terrible experience with Ozempic/Wegovy and gaining from 260-308. I notice no ill effects, I just had my three month checkup with the doctor and he thinks I’m good on maintenance mode at max dose, I’ve still got about 34 pounds as my tota…

I'm on 2.5mg and I just got sulfur burps, which, to me, is the worst side-effect of the lot. I've also gotten terrible diarrhea previously, even on the lowest dose, I've started and stopped it around five times. Hopefully fifth time's the charm, but yes, side-effects very much depend on the person. I have friends on 10mg and 15mg and they're fine.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#376

Post by imtringued »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #23

So... There's a miracle drug powerful enough to robustly lower people's all cause mortality, but since health insurance and life insurance are industries with vastly different time preferences, this is not a good thing for the life insurers because people just keep getting off the magic longevity drug and screwing up their predictions. Because, admittedly, it kind of sucks in the moment to be on. And I'm guessing jus…

It's not different time preferences. According to time preference theory the insurers have perfect information about the future so they would have taken the change in lifespan induced by GLP-1 into account before it was even invented. The assumption that mistakes are impossible is one of the core foundations of neoclassical economics. In time preference theory the bias towards the present or future is a moral issue that you get beaten over with to enact a just world fallacy.

In liquidity preference theory insurers do not have perfect information so they must make a tradeoff between collecting information and acting on the information they already have. There will be a bias towards the present and the past, because more information is available about the past and present than the future. What's being "discounted" is uncertainty, not time. Hence there is also a general bias towards stability and conservatism (sticking with existing decisions, even if they are bound to become obsolete).

Now let's apply this to the article:

The insurers don't know if you can stick with your weight loss, so they will conservatively deny coverage until they are certain that they know your health/risk profile. According to time preference theory this would never happen since the insurer already knows whether you will succeed at weightloss or not.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#377

Post by PeterStuer »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #23

So... There's a miracle drug powerful enough to robustly lower people's all cause mortality, but since health insurance and life insurance are industries with vastly different time preferences, this is not a good thing for the life insurers because people just keep getting off the magic longevity drug and screwing up their predictions. Because, admittedly, it kind of sucks in the moment to be on. And I'm guessing jus…

Pharmaceuticals generally do not drop in price while they are under patent. They will lobby like crazy to get on the approved 3rd party payment schemes though as that makes it "affordable" to more as then everybody pays regardless of wether you use or not. And a treatement that you have to continue forever or fall back? Pure gold!

Insurers certaily don't mind you living longer. More payments, less payouts. They just need to update their predictive models or coverage policies to safeguard their margins. The 'problem' is transitory.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#378

Post by PeterStuer »

loeg wrote: post #290
gregw134 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unnoticable meaning doesn't have any effect at all, or just no bad side effects?

Just in terms of bad side effects. Hunger was still suppressed. (Might be worse on the higher doses, I'm not on a very high dose.)

Why would that be a 'bad' side effect? Isn't that the whole point of the medication?

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#379

Post by multjoy »

exabrial wrote: post #370
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #23

So... There's a miracle drug powerful enough to robustly lower people's all cause mortality, but since health insurance and life insurance are industries with vastly different time preferences, this is not a good thing for the life insurers because people just keep getting off the magic longevity drug and screwing up their predictions. Because, admittedly, it kind of sucks in the moment to be on. And I'm guessing jus…

I think this is pretty far off the cusp and seems like a bit of reddit logic "health insurance is scam, internet said so". Health insurance is one of the rare services where incentives between consumer and business are well aligned. The vast majority of people are healthy. Healthcare is expensive in the US because the uninsured population continues to rise out of "they're not making me pay for it": There are entire t…

Universal healthcare is a human right.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#380

Post by data_marsupial »

esperent wrote: post #357
wincy wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tolerate tea quite well. Unseeetened iced tea by the gallon, specifically.

I'm not on any medications, and I've never been able to handle tea in the morning. Green, black, iced, hot, matcha. It always makes me feel nauseated unless I've eaten breakfast first. I always drink black coffee though, without problems.

I am similar. Green tea always makes me feel nauseous on an empty stomach. Tea with milk is normally ok.
Post reply on HN