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

571–580 of 640 posts

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#571

Post by loeg »

int_19h wrote: post #567
loeg wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't seem fair to me.

And withholding access to drugs that would extend everyone's lifespan by several years to maximize profits doesn't seem fair to me either. In fact, it's outright sociopathic.

These drugs are covered for the people whose lifespans would be extended by having them! They pay nothing! The situations where insurers/medicaid don't want to pay are more marginal cases. And even then, it's like, 1/5 the cost of child care in a major metro and only getting cheaper. If you're going to use an extraordinary mechanism to seize private property, it better have outsized impact -- seize surface parking lots and sell them to developers to build more housing.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#572

Post by rsyring »

kbos87 wrote: post #286

GLP-1s have legitimately changed my life for the better. I've always been very active but have consistently been moderately overweight. A relatively low dose of Semaglitide has helped me lose 40lbs and keep it off. I'm a year and a half in and have had very few side effects, no loss of efficacy, and my muscle mass has increased slightly despite all the negative press about muscle loss. My diet is similar in compositi…

> A relatively low dose of Semaglitide

Can you share what dose?

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#573

Post by refurb »

Aurornis wrote: post #203
petesergeant wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder if there is a point at which it is cheaper for health insurance companies to offer subsidized or even free GLP-1s to patients than pay out for other specialized medications. That the NHS is getting to a place where it’ll provide it, I’d say yes.

Everyone likes to bash the US healthcare system, but at the same time it’s remarkable how much subsidized GLP-1 access Americans are getting compared to much of the world. The paradox of discussing healthcare online.

It’s not just GLP-1s.

Look at CAR-T therapies (your cells are reprogrammed to fight your cancer). Insured patients got access in the US long before, and to a broader degree, than national healthcare systems.

Today, CAR-T utilization in cancers like lymphoma are double those of Europe in many cases. Interestingly the UK is one of the highest in Europe (despite the controversy over cancer drug spending).

While true that the US has uninsured and not all insurance is equal, suffice to say you stand a better chance to get access to new technologies in the US than most countries.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#574

Post by OptionOfT »

sizzle wrote: post #540
jawilson2 wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't drink whatsoever now. I've been on Wegovy for ~4 months. I used to be a VERY light drinker, i.e. like 10 drinks per YEAR (rum and diet coke, glass of wine, or 2-3 beers in a night). I would usually get a drink when my band played. A month or so ago, I got a bourbon, which I'll happily sip for an hour while talking, and I had to force it down, and left over half of it. Same with a beer; I went to a baseball ga…

Same with Naltrexone

Well, that one is used for alcohol abuse disorders.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#576

Post by firesteelrain »

dieortin wrote: post #561
firesteelrain wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see myself gaining 50 lb back. I would have to eat a TON which I don’t

A small energy surplus over time is enough

You have to eat 500 extra calories per day for 7 days to gain a pound. Thats basically two 20oz cokes per day. I used to drink that

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#577

Post by make3 »

nwienert wrote: post #353
make3 wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SSRIs barely have side effects

GLP-1 - Mild nausea, always temporary and in the beginning, easy to avoid by tapering dose. Extremely effective. SSRI - about 10% chance of major sexual disfunction, often permanent, significant likelihood of sleep disturbance, majority get blunted emotions. Debatably effective. Not really comparable.

I've never heard of the sleep disturbance thing, and I think you just made up the permanence of the sexual disfunction thing

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#578

Post by MisterSandman »

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…

Someone who had to take a drug to learn how to control their weight should not be lecturing others on how to do it.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#579

Post by readthenotes1 »

paulpauper wrote: post #255
readthenotes1 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If we assume about 65% of people who start GLP-1 medications quit by the end of year one, that creates a big problem. When someone stops the medication, they'll usually regain the weight they lost, and in two years, most of those key health indicators (like BMI, blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol) bounce back to their starting point. " So in addition to the quitters returning back to normal after they got l…

Except for extreme obesity, it is about the same as people not on the drugs . Even moderate obesity only lowers life expectancy by a few years in men and about none in women. of course, quality of life will may be worse. Obesity only meaningfully lowers life expectancy at a BMI of 40-45+ for men

I meant: we don't know the longevity effects of people being on a glp-1 drug for decades.

Re: GLP-1s are breaking life insurance

#580

Post by s1artibartfast »

AbstractH24 wrote: post #568
s1artibartfast wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not correct. New patents cover the new combination, but don't prevent practice of the old combination

Scroll down to the area referencing footnote 9 in this article https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11457043/ That articulates it better than I will

Like I said above, they don't extend exclusivity or prevent practice of expired IP. All you have to do is not infringe the new IP. this is what the article says too. I disagree with their greater claim; The patents aren't rocket science- most are extremely easy to read, and the authors are hiding behind weasel worlds like "may" and "could"

There are some bad patents that should never have been granted, like Novartis' famous 631 patent [1]. However, those are the exception, not the rule. If you want to put a generic drug into an auto injector, there are a dozen generic autoinjector companies looking to take your money. Drug + autoinjector does not pass the US patent office non-obviousness test (for obvious reasons). What gets patents is custom design features - bells and whistles. New features are part of the roadmap because customers will prefer them over competition without them, not because it magically extends prior IP (that isn't a thing).

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/regeneron-advances-antit...

Post reply on HN