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

331–340 of 640 posts

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#331

Post by aydyn »

dboreham wrote: post #239
jstummbillig wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean no offense, but you have a fairly substantiated body of evidence that something in the medication is causing the weight loss. The side effects do sound really shitty though.

These medications don't work in the way many people think. The drug doesn't make you "lose weight" in the sense that it causes the body to excrete fat. Rather it interferes with the constants in the gut/brain signaling/programming system such that your brain doesn't want to eat as much. That in turn leads typically to weight loss.

I dont think there is any confusion about that. How would "excreting fat" even work?

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#332

Post by wormius »

abruzzi wrote: post #302
sroussey wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be sure to pull back on the plunger and ensure there the needle is not in a blood vessel (pulling back will draw blood into the thing and you will see). You do not want the drug meant to subcutaneous to go into the blood steam. This is true for GPL-1s (all peptides for that matter), as well as insulin, and definitely mRNA vaccines.

Mounjaro uses a single use fully autometed injector--clean your skin, remove the cap, press the injector against your skin, then press a button. A springloaded needle penetrates you skin and a spring loaded plunger injects the medicine. You have no way to pull backthe plunger to see if you are in a vein/artery. I've never used Ozempic, but my understanding was it used a device similar to insulin pens--dial you dosage…

Yeah, both Ozempic and Trulicity have automated systems like this, just press a button and pop. Is there even a way to hit a vein? The needle is not very deep (it's subcutaneous, just barely under the skin). And it's the stomach, which AFAIK, doesn't have a lot of exposed veins?

Either way super simple and quick. Fairly painless. I had a weird rash one time, but apart from that a total of about 15 injections haven't had any issues on either Ozempic or Trulicity in terms of injections. Others may have difficulties, but it's been super easy IMO.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#333

Post by blindriver »

The last thing I will ever give a rats ass about is insurance companies. They are the scourge of this earth but they have used legislation to embed themselves in our every day lives.

I live in California and have no claims ever. My home insurance has doubled in 4 years to almost $4000 a year. My car insurance is about $2800/yr.

So I hope insurance companies break. Like Danerys said in Gamr of Thrones, I hope someone breaks the wheel.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#334

Post by wormius »

nwienert wrote: post #64
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just reporting my cached knowledge of people saying they experienced some adverse side effects. Also injections are not fun, even though they are probably a lot less annoying than they look.

In the 10 or so people I know who are on it, nearly all actually seem to enjoy it - reduced addictive tendencies/bad habits, appetite control, and reduced allergies seem to pretty well outweigh the minor side effects.

I was a heavy alcoholic, and the ability to quite drinking was... amazing. Now that I'm off, I just remind myself I never want to get back at that dark place, but I'm so very glad it made quitting just... happen. It's wild how easy it was. A little mental control in terms of "no, don't go to the liquor store" but it was habit more than physical addition at that point. This was with Rybelsus. Sober 4.5 years now. It was definitely not an intended side effect but I'm glad I was rx'd when I was. I was not in a good state.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#335

Post by weregiraffe »

padjo wrote: post #138
saturneria wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could apply this same stupid logic to many medications. Blood pressure medication comes to mind.

People have to believe in free will or they go crazy. Admitting that we’re just a bag of hormones and electric signals means our whole system of morality is built on sand and that’s a scary door to open.

People have to believe in free will, they have no choice (because there is no free will).

I didn't want to write this comment, but had no choice either.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#336

Post by AlphaAndOmega0 »

blackqueeriroh wrote: post #330
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…

[flagged]

I would appreciate citations. I'm a doctor on GLP-1s,who had previously convinced my mother to commence the same. In her case, it was driven clearly by failure of other methods to control her obesity and worsening liver fibrosis, on top of pre-existing diabetes. On my end, no such issues at present, but I consider it safe enough that it's a first-choice approach to robust weight loss, and I personally use it in conjunction with diet and exercise.

"Relatively high levels of significant side effects" is a vague and unhelpful claim:

High compared to what? What counts as a significant side effect here? What actually are the side effects in question? Are those side effects permanent and irreversible? Can they be avoided by adjusting the dose? Dozens of such considerations come into play.

No drug I'm aware of is perfectly safe, and I know many drugs indeed.

To the best of my knowledge, the combined risk of taking semaglutide utterly pales in comparison to the clear and present harms of obesity. The only clear downside is cost, and while I'm lucky enough to to have access to cheaper sources, they're not even that expensive when you consider the QOL and health benefits.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#337

Post by AlphaAndOmega0 »

nwienert wrote: post #64
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just reporting my cached knowledge of people saying they experienced some adverse side effects. Also injections are not fun, even though they are probably a lot less annoying than they look.

In the 10 or so people I know who are on it, nearly all actually seem to enjoy it - reduced addictive tendencies/bad habits, appetite control, and reduced allergies seem to pretty well outweigh the minor side effects.

I'm on semaglutide for weight loss purposes, while having no other health issues relevant here.

I don't think it's made any difference to any addictive tendencies or my bad habits (and with ADHD, those certainly exist). It certainly helps with the appetite of course.

This is definitely anecdotal evidence, but it's wise to hold on longer for more data to come in before advocating for it on those grounds alone.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#338

Post by wincy »

stingraycharles wrote: post #284
loeg wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't even that awful in maintenance -- just expensive. The unpleasant part is when you're increasing the dose. After a while at the same dose, it's more or less unnoticeable IMO.

I wouldn’t say unnoticeable, but rather a trade-off that’s fine. My stomach is definitely more sensitive, can’t handle coffee in the morning anymore, etc. It probably depends on the person.

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

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#339

Post by strken »

blackqueeriroh wrote: post #330
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…

[flagged]

Your citation measures 15-year mortality in adults 20-49. The P values for BMI's relationship with all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality were 0.071 and 0.030 respectively. It compares BMI against waist circumference and body fat percentage and suggests that the latter measures are better. I think it's misleading to say that "weight is not a primary predictor of health" based on this evidence.

First, the paper is talking about BMI rather than weight.

Second, what most people mean by "weight" in ordinary conversation is closer to body fat percentage than it is to BMI: Arnold Schwarzenegger was famously obese by BMI, but anybody who called him overweight during a conversation at the pub would likely be told he doesn't count.

Thirdly, the paper was close to statistical significance, even looking at young people and even with a cohort of a bit under 5000 people, so it doesn't rule out a correlation with BMI either (although yes, it does suggest BMI is a proxy for body fat, but this isn't a controversial statement).

Fourthly, GLP-1 agonists do reduce body fat[0], and body fat is the measure suggested by the paper you cited as being better than BMI.

[0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00142...

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#340

Post by const_cast »

blackqueeriroh wrote: post #330
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…

[flagged]

These types of arguments are somewhat worthless when they're not made in context to obesity.

What I mean is, you should be comparing the risk of GLP-1s versus the risk of obesity, because realistically this is the vast majority of people's risk analysis criteria here.

Obesity increases your risk of CVD, metabolic syndrome, diabetes, liver disease, kidney disease, joint diseases, and overall mortality. CVD, in particular, is the number 1 cause of death in many developed countries.

Like all drugs, GLP-1s come with risk. This fact, however, is worthless. We must ask if it is less risky than the aggregate sum of the above diseases. I think the answer is overwhelming yes.

Therefore, obese people should probably consider GLP-1 medications. Particularly if they have tried, and failed, weight loss before. Which every obese person has.

In addition, when considering the downside of medication, we MUST compare it to the alternatives. Many obese people are already on multiple life-long medications. Statins, hypertension medication, insulin and other diabetes management drugs, etc.

Not only do these medications require significantly more management than a GLP-1, but they, too, come with their own set of risks, which we must then add to the risk of disease.

I, personally, have taken multiple chemotherapy drugs to cure my cancer. These drugs make GLP-1s look like nothing. They have damaged my body in irreversible ways. They've aged my blood, exposed me to extreme levels of known carcinogens, raised my risk of mortality, and overall lowered my quality of life.

However, I am thankful for them. Yes, my risk of mortality is much higher. But, compared to cancer, which has a 100% chance to kill me, it was a worthy tradeoff.

Post reply on HN