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

521–530 of 640 posts

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#521

Post by reverendsteveii »

coredog64 wrote: post #489
aqme28 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re thinking too highly about the incentives of the US healthcare system. Since insurance is tied to your employer (and therefore changing every few years), and most people die on Medicare, there’s not much incentive for insurance companies to pay for preventative care that won’t actually help you for several decades.

This misunderstands how employer-provided insurance works for most people. Large employers sign up with a company like Cigna to provide a network and administrative process. But the actual healthcare is covered by the employer. So really, Cigna or BCBS don't really give a rip if you're taking a bunch of money out of the pool.

So what you're saying is when I file a claim and it's paid (precious miracle that that is) it comes from my employer and not the insurance company?

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#522

Post by reverendsteveii »

nerevarthelame wrote: post #120
firesteelrain wrote: post #24

I was on Mounjaro for two months. I was also dieting and walking 10k steps a day. I lost 25 lb and my A1C went down to 5.0 from 5.7. All my cholesterol numbers were in range. I stopped taking it and lost 25 more. I haven’t regained the weight. People who gain it back did not learn the lesson and did not effectively change their habits. You need the discipline - and a good support system. But if you don’t have that an…

This is akin to saying a severely anxious person should be able to take an SSRI for a few months, learn how to change their thinking, and stay off antidepressants for the rest of their life. So simple. Must be their fault if they can't pull it off. Perhaps that works for some people. I'm glad it seems to have worked for you. But the facts of the world we live in show that it doesn't work for most. "Learn the lesson a…

As someone who took SSRIs for a while my plan w my doctor was always to use meds for support as I developed a toolkit to deal with my emotions without medication and then to re-evaluate periodically to see if the meds were still necessary. It took a few years, but eventually we weaned me off. I'm glad we did, now that my life is in a better place and I'm a bit more agile with my thinking I'm quite glad to be rid of all the gross side effects of the drug, but when I was having a rough time those side effects were well worth the stabilization the drug brought me.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#523

Post by reverendsteveii »

SirMaster wrote: post #476
nerevarthelame wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is akin to saying a severely anxious person should be able to take an SSRI for a few months, learn how to change their thinking, and stay off antidepressants for the rest of their life. So simple. Must be their fault if they can't pull it off. Perhaps that works for some people. I'm glad it seems to have worked for you. But the facts of the world we live in show that it doesn't work for most. "Learn the lesson a…

You think that controlling your anxiety and controlling what you put into your mouth are equal things? I would say that controlling what you put into your mouth is easier than controlling your anxiety.

>I would say that controlling what you put into your mouth is easier than controlling your anxiety

Then explain why people have so much trouble with it without resorting to a thought-terminating cliche

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#524

Post by Marsymars »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #142
Marsymars wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a pretty bad deal if you’re 10 years into a 20-year term, and your rates were determined prior to a decade of inflation and new pre-existing conditions.

I admit that's unfortunate. I don't think that was a "bad deal" in the sense that anyone grievously misled you or anything. I would feel bummed out, but not angry or like I actually got ripped off, in other words. When I signed up for the 20-year term, part of what I was being asked to do was estimate how likely I think it is for this firm to actually be around for that full 20 years. That's just part of the game.

Maybe in some platonic ideal, but in practice a) consumers (and even brokers) aren’t that sophisticated, and b) likelyhood of the company being around in 20 years isn’t baked into the price. When I shopped for insurance there were only 3 options with contract terms that passed muster, and all three companies are large ones that I’d expect to be around in 20 years to a degree that has no relation to the price quotes I got.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#525

Post by int_19h »

refurb wrote: post #473
int_19h wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If these things really boost life expectancy that much, this sounds like a textbook case for eminent domain.

Imagine that incentive for R&D. “If you invest hundreds of millions and it turns out to be life changing, we’re going to seize it”

Eminent domain implies fair compensation.

The point is that you don't get to withhold the drug from people to maximize profits.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#526

Post by int_19h »

pmyteh wrote: post #431
eru wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no fan of the patent system, but "patent system promises spoils for coming up with great new drug, companies comes up with great new drug, companies gets spoils" is exactly how it's supposed to work. Yes, it's sucks that you have to pay, but that's how you incentives getting the wonder drugs invented in the first place. (I have my own take on this, but if anything this is a 'textbook case' in favour of the patent…

Depending on how transformative the effects are (and the price drop possible upon genericisation) then there could be a compulsory licensing trade to do here. The drug companies are presumably pricing optimally for profit (but not for maximum public benefit, for which the optimum price is ~0). You could calculate the net present value of the drug companies' total profits attributable to the patent, add on 10% as a bo…

That is exactly what I have in mind. "Eminent domain" doesn't mean just taking things with no recompense, but I don't think the company should be entitled to profit maximization at the expense of literally billions of people worldwide.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#527

Post by loeg »

noboostforyou wrote: post #445
loeg wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That US price is way too high. No consumer pays that much. You can buy it straight from Novo for $500/mo.

Lilly also offers it direct to consumer for $500/mo

Lilly offers Tirzepatide for that price, yes. GP is explicitly talking about Semaglutide, though.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#528

Post by Spivak »

freeplay wrote: post #513
Spivak wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? We have an overweight and obesity epidemic that has persisted through everything else we've gotten enough political capital to try thus far. The "miracle" drug is the most promising direction we've had in a long time. Whatever possible adverse long term effects have to be (plausibility they actually happen) x (harm they cause) > known harms of being overweight. The scale of the solution is allowed to match t…

"We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" The obesity trend has happened almost in lockstep with the proliferation of highly processed foods. Butter and animal fats being replaced with low quality, hydrogenated vegetable oils. Cane sugar being replaced with high fructose corn syrup and other highly processed sweeteners. Sodas and sugary juices replacing water. Food like substances with little to no nutritional…

I agree with every word of your analysis and I agree that we've tried basically nothing. But this is why I talked about political capital—every one of your suggestions has been available for the last twenty years and nothing has come of it and the problem continues to get worse. When you say something like, "healthy food should be more affordable and readily available" you'll get a lot of nods of agreement but when it comes time to turn that idea into actual policy everyone gets cold feet. Proposals like price caps for whole foods, subsidies for meals that meet some threshold of healthy, sin taxes for unhealthy foods, outright bans of certain ingredients the votes dry right up.

But people want Ozempic, they will actively seek it out, and in numbers that can actually make a dent in the problem. In a way that people don't seek out healthy alternatives or exercise. Because people don't want to be healthy, they want to be skinny. You can't control people, you can only respond to them and, ya know, whatever works man.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#529

Post by loeg »

solumunus wrote: post #366
Auracle wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. I’m at a healthy weight but I’m taking retatrutide for IBS and it’s working wonders. Very low dose, though. I originally tried it with semaglutide before the weight loss craze kicked off and the first few days of the week were worse and the latter half of the week was better, so that didn’t make sense for me to stay on.

With all of these long acting GLP's you will get a much smoother experience dosing them 2-3 times/week.

Yeah, I guess it's worth adding my relatively moderate side effect experience has been dosing 2-3x/week the whole time.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#530

Post by skissane »

> They switched from 30-day to 90-day refills. Suddenly, patients had to think about their medication four times a year instead of twelve. Adherence rates shot up almost immediately.

When I have a “refill” (here in Australia we call them “repeats”) due, my pharmacy sends me an SMS… I just reply “yes please” and that goes straight to the pharmacist who dispenses, and I get another SMS telling me the dispensed medication is ready to pick up

I’m on tirzepatide and I’m committed but I’m “going a bit slow” because the side effects started to get a bit too much. Still, my base expectation is I’m taking a GLP-1 agonist for the rest of my life, unless my doctor tells me I have to stop for some reason, or I somehow go bankrupt and can’t afford it any more.

Post reply on HN