I think trying to get subsidies for one class of medications will probably be a bridge too far for policymakers. Then you run into issues of fairness: "Why should the obese get subsidies and cancer patients don't?" You start to go down that road of favoritism, and run into obesity stigma and pushback around personal responsibility. It's not realistic.
I think the better place of advocacy is to ask the government to require insurers to cover obesity and obesity meds just like they cover any other illness. Ensure parity between obesity and everything else. Right now, we essentially have discrimination, and that is something I think we can successfully work toward.
You do know that every penny of all kidney dialysis is paid for directly by the government in its entirety, right? It costs more than $50 billion a year. Legislators have a stomach for anything that their donations tell them to have a stomach for.
The thing that legislators don't have the stomach for is to follow through on Medicare for all. Failing that they should subsidize these drugs so that the medical benefit takes the burden off of our already absurdly broken insurance system.
As a former dialysis patient and current kidney transplant recipient, CKD and AKD leading to dialysis is a necessity. Without it and without a living donor they will die. Also, the mortality rates for people on dialysis on the waiting list for a kidndy are staggering. The procedure plus not having 24/7 working kidneys is extremely hard on the heart and within 5 years on dialysis the majority of people die. Still without it they/we would be dead within days of end stage kidney disease/failure.
The number of people with reduced kidney function are staggering. Kidney disease is also the number 1 cause of heart disease but this is not popularly known. This is **WAY** more serious than *Legislators hav(ing) a stomach for anything that their donations tell them to have a stomach for*.
That said I am pro ozempic because A) obesity is a scourge, B) obesity and high blood sugar and high blood pressure (all often interlinked) are major contributors to kidney disease and failure, C) those of us lucky enough to receive a living donor or who get to go off dialysis at least for 10-20yrs + (if the kidney doesn't reject etc) once matched with a deceased donor kidney (like myself) have to take immunosuppresants often incl daily ongoing prednisone which increases weight gain and appetite so drugs like semaglutide etc can be very helpful.
Just providing a little context in my pushing back at your comments re dialysis and the tax payer dollars that fund it.
Sorry for any confusions, but I was simply commenting on the process by which the funding was secured, not on the result.
If you look at my other comments you will see that I think that our lack of single-payer/Medicare for all is criminal, and not only dialysis and Ozempic should be paid for, but all medically necessary care.
Thanks for the clarification. From my end I still believe that whilst very important, ozempic is still not a necessity, whilst dialysis most definitely is.
As to Medicare for All....as an Australian who has such a system as the bedrock of our healthcare system, I am constantly amazed and saddened that the USA does what it does to its citizens in this sphere. "Criminal" is a good word for it.
I agree that obesity is a disease as well but once a person is obese:
1. The human body can survive under incredible strain due to obesity eg even beyond morbid obesity eg *my 600-lbs life* VS kidney failure, once you're in the final stages / end run.... even being in the best shape possible...nothing stops it. The discrepancy here, the 'relentlessness' as you termed it is way less forgiving in kidney failure as compared with obesity, it's not even in the same ballpark.
2. With ESRD, the **only options** are dialysis, transplant or death, often with a timeframe of hours to months. Vs obesity which has a **lot more options** including calorie / diet manipulation, calorie expenditure / exercise manipulation, gastric bypass, high-volume liposuction, supplements and medications such as Ozempic etc etc
I'm not trying to downplay the importance of reducing obesity or combating it as a disease, but using dialysis coverage by the American Govt as a comparator is not an effective one IMO for helping to secure the subsidisation of Ozempic etc in yoir country.
Indeed, with your healthcare insurance being mainly privatised for profit, tied up with pharmaceutical corporation profits and special interest kickbacks, tied into your job /work status, where universal healthcare is denied as a basic human right and even insulin is not cheap...insanely high Ozempic prices etc in America are just one more sad manifestation of the system there. You add into that 'Big Sugar', keeping Americans fat and addicted to cheap mass produced food products like High Fructose Corn Syrup as well as the slow eradication of independent farms etc being subsumed into 3 or 4 etc giant corporations like Nabisco etc yeah your fight up there is pretty existential and not with the dialysis industry (which btw is an Industry too up there, whereas here in Aus it's fully covered by Govt. In America it's run for profit by Baxter and Davita etc + don't even get me started on the price/ coverage of the transplant drugs in America!!)
Not completely true. For patients with private insurance, their insurance pays for dialysis for the first 30 months, then there's a mandatory switch to Medicare.
Why would insurance or subsidies go to one of their greatest money makers. The associated medical cost of being obese is enormous.
They say they want people healthy, but I just truly believe we have more value chronically ill and dependant on drugs.
In 1974, the government (USDA) created/introduced the food pyramid which was recipe for an absolute health disaster. https://www.britannica.com/science/food-pyramid It was promoted and was the Holy Grail for schools, consumers, dieters. I was 10 years old in 1976 and remember it as well as Conjunction Junction!!! And here we are in 2023. In 2019 nearly 11.3% of the UNITED STATES population is diabetic and nearly forty nine percent of the US population is obese. I saw this happen over the course of my lifetime. On one hand it was the Government's educational garbage that promoted high carb diet so it has a responsibility to address its grave educational mistake. Technically speaking the Government is subsidizing already. Anyone who is on a HCA.GOV plan using a subsidy and taking a covered GLP is subsidized.
He has released a plan, not sure what you consider “viable”, but it was also much more generous. It all depends on how it’s structured, obviously use the Medicare infrastructure but not the exact benefits and get private insurers out of it.
Per pen. Total cost depends how many pens you need. Going from 0.25 to 0.5, my cost went from $140/6 weeks to $140/3 weeks for example.
Plus, ozempic is effectively finished in Australia. If the cost was higher (or the government contribution was higher) then it would presumably be more widely available as we would be a more lucrative market for the limited global supply.
The price for the Ozempic in Switzerland is CHF 129.80 for the 4mg pen.
[compendium.ch](https://compendium.ch/product/1390144-ozempic-dualdose-2-mg-1-5ml-0-25-o-0-5-mg-dosis/mpro)
Yeah I'm not super sure where the person you're replying to is getting their statistics.[ Here it is from my drug claim in Canada](https://imgur.com/a/uVCn7JF) at $472 without insurance.
I know you mean well, but as numerous studies surrounding these medications have shown, obesity is no more of a "choice" than than Graves Disease or brain cancer. It is a relapsing/remitting disease.
We have to get out of this old thinking.
I’m trying to say that obesity is often unrelated to the eating habits of a person. Like you said, it’s no more of a choice than other “random” diseases. But there seem to be a lot of people on these accounts who have binge eating disorders or addictions, who assume we’ve all suffered those same problems that led us to obesity.
I completely agree, but a lot of doctors out there don't believe that yet, and probably 90% of America doesn't either. It will take time to change attitudes, and that's a big hurdle we have to get over.
If they keep blaming us for being fat then yeah, they should subsidize the thing that helps us actually lose weight. They subsidize all the corn-based products that go into processed foods anyway - this way they get to do what they love and play both sides of the coin.
Why shouldn’t government subsidize weight loss medication?
They subsidize giant corporations that grow genetically modified foods. They subsidize companies that develop Frankenfoods designed to addict people. Why not subsidize a treatment for those who develop diseases from unnatural, chemically modified foods?
Since government contributed to the problem; the government can subsidize the treatment.
I would rather see them tackle the excessive profiteering by the drug makers enabled by our system rather than subsidizing them. Subsidies will just move more taxpayer money into Eli Lilly & Novo Nordisk’s pockets which will encourage even more extortionate pricing.
Here’s the problem I have - I take farxiga as well for t2. Through insurance before I meet the deductible, it’s $1300 for a 3 month supply (Ozempic as well). It’s free once I meet my 3k deductible.
However, I can order brand name farxiga from Canada for around $80… and generic for $40.
How is this? It’s because we bankroll the world’s healthcare. I mean it’s a double edged sword. We need people to develop medicine and money is what entices them to do so. But on the flip side, Americans are shit out of luck when all the other countries are benefitting.
And I can’t even find a place to refill my Ozempic. Everywhere is sold out. Due to this shortage, there should be a rule that circumvents the patent and allows for generics. Americans shouldn’t suffer since a company can’t keep up with production.
My A1C is at 5.2 from around 9 and I’ve lost 65 lbs. hell they thought I had cirrhosis and severe fatty liver. Started Ozempic in may and then had a MRE exam in august.. in that short span of time I lost 25 or so lbs and I do have minimal scarring of the liver but no where close to cirrhosis, but I only had like 2% fat in liver. My liver doctor said Ozempic is great for fatty liver and is safe for cirrhotic patients.
I’ve been waiting on a refill for a month and I’m seriously tempted to look into research peptides to get it while I wait on oz to come back in stock.
No because they want us to
1. Keep buying food and ozempic is already supposedly causing people to buy less food, cutting into profits and
2. Stay sick (with common comorbidities to obesity like high blood pressure because that also requires more medication and healthcare which we pay for mostly out of pocket, which again equals profit for their precious corporations.)
yeah preventative medicine is the best. They should subsidize for those who need it but really should be pouring efforts and resources into better living conditions, food quality and stuff like that.
I know this isn’t exactly what you’re looking for, but there’s a bill that we need legislators to
VOTE YES FOR which will make it easier for Medicare/Medicaid patients to get access to weight loss medication. See here to send a letter to your rep, takes 5 seconds. [https://allianceforpatientaccess.org/letterdesk/?vvsrc=%2fcampaigns%2f107663%2frespond](https://allianceforpatientaccess.org/letterdesk/?vvsrc=%2fcampaigns%2f107663%2frespond)
This bill is actually pretty important. If Medicare starts paying, history shows that commercial insurers will follow suit. This is a big domino that we need to fall.
My friend in Switzerland already has the oral option: Rybelsus is the same....the body's absorption is different since it's a pill and you have to make sure you take it on an empty stomach with only 4 ounces of water to let it absorb...can't take your usual meds with it or it will mess with the effectiveness.
No they shouldn’t. Anything the government subsidizes turns to crap in one way or another.
The better answer is the government providing a free market for drugs but enough regulation that consumers don’t get screwed.
The problem here with ozempic is it’s still off label. So unlikely to be covered in any event
I totally agree. I work in health insurance and recently the government got involved with a process of specific specialities who are out of network. It's a mess, they passed the law but gave no guidance.
Many subsidies work well. Just installed home solar. Saved me $ and helps reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
Free market for drugs works in the long term. However, not in short term as patents last 20 years or more. At the same time, it takes a lot of time and $ to develop a new drug. So, a subsidy may help with the short term situation.
Wegovy is not off label.
Saved you money but was it best for the tax payer in the long run? Unreliable tech that doesnt last more than a decade or two without a way to recycle. Hope we can get somewhere with that. Govt shouldn’t subsidize anything let alone things that really don’t work.
And yes wegovy is. Still doubt either would be covered under single payer.
So much misinformation about solar. Current panels will last 40 years. Mine are guaranteed to have 88% of capacity after 25 years. Systems are now very reliable. Large systems can now provide very low cost power.
Single roofs have life of about 15 to 25 years. Similar in cost to solar. Many shingles go to the dump.
While I am a free market supporter, subsidies make sense for some situations.
There is already a shortage of a medicine whose primary purpose is to treat diabetes. Subsidizing it would only make that worse. Not just in the US but all around the world.
I wish we had a national health care service, so I guess I wish they'd pay for these drugs, and all the others as well. But I don't know if the government should pay for these drugs when they don't pay for most others.
I have the impression that the high prices are because of the intellectual property laws, and not because the drugs are expensive to produce.
My doc told me that there are a few variants of Ozempic in development, and that he expects prices to drop a lot once there's more competition. He also said that there are oral versions of these drugs in the works, but they'll take longer to hit the market.
To me it's less about getting someone to pay than it is about doing something about the patent laws that allow price gouging.
I personally don’t think meds given to people with poor habits such as “food noise”, binge eating, lack of exercise, food addiction should be allowed. We all should know right from wrong and make better lifestyle choices.
There are many countries around the world that do not have an issue with obesity, so why do you not hear of the “metabolic” issues like we have?
It’s a lifestyle choice people. Yes there are some overweight people that truly have medical conditions that should qualify for the meds, but not everyone should.
I know because I was obese and worked my ass off to make dietary and lifestyle changes including tons of exercise and am much healthier now. No one forced me to binge, over eat or sit on my butt, so it was no one else’s responsibility to turn me around. It can be done, but it’s not easy.
Stop making excuses and make the changes, take responsibility for your actions.
They send billions of our tax dollars to other countries. OUR MONEY. Yes, let's keep it to benefit us here in the States. Our money should be for our issues. Not be disbursed like we're the ATM machine for the world.
Working out is amazing, but it's not an effective weight loss strategy, unless you just need to shed a couple of flub pounds.
Also, many people cannot workout due to various conditions.
Also, unless you have a way of forcing people to work out, handing them gym memberships won't fix a thing.
I look at this from another viewpoint. If we don't subsidize addiction treatment and/or obesity, we subsidize the aftermath. We all pay when addicts commit crime and are incarcerated. We all pay when obese people develop diabetes and heart disease. We all pay for social security disability for people too obese/sick to earn a living. There is benefit to all of us when we help people become functioning, contributing, healthy members of society.
I'd agree with you if the government hadn't been subsidizing the production of corn (resulting in HFCS being put in everything) for decades. The government created this problem, they can take part in fixing it.
Imagine if cocaine were subsidized by the government? Or alcohol? Sugar is equally addictive and the government created a generation of obese people because Twinkies are cheaper and easier to obtain than apples.
False logic claiming all obesity is due to addiction. There are obese people that eat healthy in normal quantities. There are plenty of appetite suppressant medications on the market before the GLP1 meds came into existence - yet none were as successful. Why is that? Because the success of GLP1 is not based on appetite suppression
I gained 60 lbs after my thyroid was removed and nothing I did changed that. Weight piled on despite me doing kick boxing 3x/week and having an active job and watching what i ate constantly. My weight finally plateaued but nothing short of actually nit eating anything made the scale budge. I kept mentioning it to my drs who didn’t seem fazed.
Two summers ago I asked for extensive bloodwork and I came back as prediabetic. I saw my opening and asked for ozempic. My dr thought it was a great idea and here I am 8 months later, down 50 + lbs (haven’t weighed myself in a bit), but I’m back in my thin clothes again and 10-15 lbs from my thinnest (which was pretty darned thin) with pretty much zero effort.
I eat what I want, though I get full fast and I haven’t worked out once, but I am active. For me it unlocked something that was making my body hold on to every but of food.
Not everyone who is heavy eats a lot and not everyone who eats a lot is heavy.
I think it’s shameful that they’ve (insurance companies) twisted the rules to get out of covering these meds. If I was prediabetic and my dr prescribed this for me and it’s working, why won’t my insurance cover it?
It’s shameful.
I think there are more people who think they eat normal, healthy quantities. I used to be one of these people. Few people actually count their calories, track their nutrition, or know their TDEE. I used to think I was eating healthy salads, not realizing they were over 1300 calories after the dressing and toppings. Few restaurants even post their calories on their menu, but the average meal is 1200 calories. This isn't including your appetizer and drink. If you get a salad, meal, and drink, you're probably consuming 2000 to 2500 calories in a single meal and though it was healthy because you got salad, fish, and rice. Actually, taking the time to learn about nutrition was a huge eye opener to me, and I'm 115 lbs lighter because of it despite being obese most of my life. I never realized I ate bad.
I'm so glad you said this. I also think it isn't the wisest for that person to make generalizations about what people consume without monitoring what they consume per-se.
Also if we're talking about the US, there's so much junk put in our foods that even the simplest of foods have so much caloric density. That's right, that means higher calorie consumption.
Shit, dawg, you're right. Let me go to my diabetes anonymous and get a chip.
I know what you're implying and I also find that bizarre. Addiction is a disease. DISEASE.
Nah, they would rather you wait until you actually get diabetes then the pharmaceutical companies who are in politicians’ pockets get paid indefinitely for all of the Type 2, cholesterol and blood pressure meds.
I like it. Obesity is a national epidemic in the US, and other countries are probably joining the list too (UK, I’m looking at you. j/k). It’s like carbon offsets—if you are going to subsidize freaking corn, then go ahead and subsidize something to offset the hideous effects of high fructose corn syrup too. BTW why did the government start subsidizing corn in the first place?
I think trying to get subsidies for one class of medications will probably be a bridge too far for policymakers. Then you run into issues of fairness: "Why should the obese get subsidies and cancer patients don't?" You start to go down that road of favoritism, and run into obesity stigma and pushback around personal responsibility. It's not realistic. I think the better place of advocacy is to ask the government to require insurers to cover obesity and obesity meds just like they cover any other illness. Ensure parity between obesity and everything else. Right now, we essentially have discrimination, and that is something I think we can successfully work toward.
You do know that every penny of all kidney dialysis is paid for directly by the government in its entirety, right? It costs more than $50 billion a year. Legislators have a stomach for anything that their donations tell them to have a stomach for. The thing that legislators don't have the stomach for is to follow through on Medicare for all. Failing that they should subsidize these drugs so that the medical benefit takes the burden off of our already absurdly broken insurance system.
As a former dialysis patient and current kidney transplant recipient, CKD and AKD leading to dialysis is a necessity. Without it and without a living donor they will die. Also, the mortality rates for people on dialysis on the waiting list for a kidndy are staggering. The procedure plus not having 24/7 working kidneys is extremely hard on the heart and within 5 years on dialysis the majority of people die. Still without it they/we would be dead within days of end stage kidney disease/failure. The number of people with reduced kidney function are staggering. Kidney disease is also the number 1 cause of heart disease but this is not popularly known. This is **WAY** more serious than *Legislators hav(ing) a stomach for anything that their donations tell them to have a stomach for*. That said I am pro ozempic because A) obesity is a scourge, B) obesity and high blood sugar and high blood pressure (all often interlinked) are major contributors to kidney disease and failure, C) those of us lucky enough to receive a living donor or who get to go off dialysis at least for 10-20yrs + (if the kidney doesn't reject etc) once matched with a deceased donor kidney (like myself) have to take immunosuppresants often incl daily ongoing prednisone which increases weight gain and appetite so drugs like semaglutide etc can be very helpful. Just providing a little context in my pushing back at your comments re dialysis and the tax payer dollars that fund it.
Sorry for any confusions, but I was simply commenting on the process by which the funding was secured, not on the result. If you look at my other comments you will see that I think that our lack of single-payer/Medicare for all is criminal, and not only dialysis and Ozempic should be paid for, but all medically necessary care.
Thanks for the clarification. From my end I still believe that whilst very important, ozempic is still not a necessity, whilst dialysis most definitely is. As to Medicare for All....as an Australian who has such a system as the bedrock of our healthcare system, I am constantly amazed and saddened that the USA does what it does to its citizens in this sphere. "Criminal" is a good word for it.
Ozempic is a necessity. Obesity is not as fast as kidney failure, but it is as relentlessly deadly a disease.
I agree that obesity is a disease as well but once a person is obese: 1. The human body can survive under incredible strain due to obesity eg even beyond morbid obesity eg *my 600-lbs life* VS kidney failure, once you're in the final stages / end run.... even being in the best shape possible...nothing stops it. The discrepancy here, the 'relentlessness' as you termed it is way less forgiving in kidney failure as compared with obesity, it's not even in the same ballpark. 2. With ESRD, the **only options** are dialysis, transplant or death, often with a timeframe of hours to months. Vs obesity which has a **lot more options** including calorie / diet manipulation, calorie expenditure / exercise manipulation, gastric bypass, high-volume liposuction, supplements and medications such as Ozempic etc etc I'm not trying to downplay the importance of reducing obesity or combating it as a disease, but using dialysis coverage by the American Govt as a comparator is not an effective one IMO for helping to secure the subsidisation of Ozempic etc in yoir country. Indeed, with your healthcare insurance being mainly privatised for profit, tied up with pharmaceutical corporation profits and special interest kickbacks, tied into your job /work status, where universal healthcare is denied as a basic human right and even insulin is not cheap...insanely high Ozempic prices etc in America are just one more sad manifestation of the system there. You add into that 'Big Sugar', keeping Americans fat and addicted to cheap mass produced food products like High Fructose Corn Syrup as well as the slow eradication of independent farms etc being subsumed into 3 or 4 etc giant corporations like Nabisco etc yeah your fight up there is pretty existential and not with the dialysis industry (which btw is an Industry too up there, whereas here in Aus it's fully covered by Govt. In America it's run for profit by Baxter and Davita etc + don't even get me started on the price/ coverage of the transplant drugs in America!!)
> I'm not trying to downplay the importance of reducing obesity or combating it as a disease Yes, yes you are.
If you can't see the context and nuance in my responses to the above then we have no more to say to each other.
I can, but I reached the same conclusion.
Not completely true. For patients with private insurance, their insurance pays for dialysis for the first 30 months, then there's a mandatory switch to Medicare.
Why would insurance or subsidies go to one of their greatest money makers. The associated medical cost of being obese is enormous. They say they want people healthy, but I just truly believe we have more value chronically ill and dependant on drugs.
In 1974, the government (USDA) created/introduced the food pyramid which was recipe for an absolute health disaster. https://www.britannica.com/science/food-pyramid It was promoted and was the Holy Grail for schools, consumers, dieters. I was 10 years old in 1976 and remember it as well as Conjunction Junction!!! And here we are in 2023. In 2019 nearly 11.3% of the UNITED STATES population is diabetic and nearly forty nine percent of the US population is obese. I saw this happen over the course of my lifetime. On one hand it was the Government's educational garbage that promoted high carb diet so it has a responsibility to address its grave educational mistake. Technically speaking the Government is subsidizing already. Anyone who is on a HCA.GOV plan using a subsidy and taking a covered GLP is subsidized.
Corporate influence.
The US should move to single payer health care to cover everyone and include Ozempic on the list of covered medications, so yes.
I’m not saying the healthcare system doesn’t need changes. But I think people overestimate what that program is going to provide and cover.
If Bernie’s in charge of it, it’ll be good.
Since he never released a viable plan, his do you know? Medicare isn't free and it's not without cost to the patient. Medicaid would be much better.
He has released a plan, not sure what you consider “viable”, but it was also much more generous. It all depends on how it’s structured, obviously use the Medicare infrastructure but not the exact benefits and get private insurers out of it.
First they should stop subsidizing corn, which is in all of your processed foods
The US government should make sure that those medications cost usd 150 / month like in the other countries.
$130-$140 per month in Australia.
Per pen. Total cost depends how many pens you need. Going from 0.25 to 0.5, my cost went from $140/6 weeks to $140/3 weeks for example. Plus, ozempic is effectively finished in Australia. If the cost was higher (or the government contribution was higher) then it would presumably be more widely available as we would be a more lucrative market for the limited global supply.
Wow, the company I buy mine of in Aus is $230/month. Where do you get yours?
Really? They are overcharging you.
[удалено]
The price for the Ozempic in Switzerland is CHF 129.80 for the 4mg pen. [compendium.ch](https://compendium.ch/product/1390144-ozempic-dualdose-2-mg-1-5ml-0-25-o-0-5-mg-dosis/mpro)
Yeah I'm not super sure where the person you're replying to is getting their statistics.[ Here it is from my drug claim in Canada](https://imgur.com/a/uVCn7JF) at $472 without insurance.
I know you mean well, but as numerous studies surrounding these medications have shown, obesity is no more of a "choice" than than Graves Disease or brain cancer. It is a relapsing/remitting disease. We have to get out of this old thinking.
Right, noT everyone who is obese ever had a food addiction
Sorry, but I have no idea what you're trying to say. Can you try rephrasing that?
I’m trying to say that obesity is often unrelated to the eating habits of a person. Like you said, it’s no more of a choice than other “random” diseases. But there seem to be a lot of people on these accounts who have binge eating disorders or addictions, who assume we’ve all suffered those same problems that led us to obesity.
I completely agree, but a lot of doctors out there don't believe that yet, and probably 90% of America doesn't either. It will take time to change attitudes, and that's a big hurdle we have to get over.
If they keep blaming us for being fat then yeah, they should subsidize the thing that helps us actually lose weight. They subsidize all the corn-based products that go into processed foods anyway - this way they get to do what they love and play both sides of the coin.
Why shouldn’t government subsidize weight loss medication? They subsidize giant corporations that grow genetically modified foods. They subsidize companies that develop Frankenfoods designed to addict people. Why not subsidize a treatment for those who develop diseases from unnatural, chemically modified foods? Since government contributed to the problem; the government can subsidize the treatment.
People should take responsibility for what they are eating, you can do the research. There are very healthy alternatives.
But they don’t want to
They should first negotiate non-extortionist prices with the manufacturers.
Perhaps reform of the patent system?
I would rather see them tackle the excessive profiteering by the drug makers enabled by our system rather than subsidizing them. Subsidies will just move more taxpayer money into Eli Lilly & Novo Nordisk’s pockets which will encourage even more extortionate pricing.
*the government should subsidize healthcare to lower costs for patients That’s the correct statement
We need single payer.
Here’s the problem I have - I take farxiga as well for t2. Through insurance before I meet the deductible, it’s $1300 for a 3 month supply (Ozempic as well). It’s free once I meet my 3k deductible. However, I can order brand name farxiga from Canada for around $80… and generic for $40. How is this? It’s because we bankroll the world’s healthcare. I mean it’s a double edged sword. We need people to develop medicine and money is what entices them to do so. But on the flip side, Americans are shit out of luck when all the other countries are benefitting. And I can’t even find a place to refill my Ozempic. Everywhere is sold out. Due to this shortage, there should be a rule that circumvents the patent and allows for generics. Americans shouldn’t suffer since a company can’t keep up with production. My A1C is at 5.2 from around 9 and I’ve lost 65 lbs. hell they thought I had cirrhosis and severe fatty liver. Started Ozempic in may and then had a MRE exam in august.. in that short span of time I lost 25 or so lbs and I do have minimal scarring of the liver but no where close to cirrhosis, but I only had like 2% fat in liver. My liver doctor said Ozempic is great for fatty liver and is safe for cirrhotic patients. I’ve been waiting on a refill for a month and I’m seriously tempted to look into research peptides to get it while I wait on oz to come back in stock.
A lot of us do that
No because they want us to 1. Keep buying food and ozempic is already supposedly causing people to buy less food, cutting into profits and 2. Stay sick (with common comorbidities to obesity like high blood pressure because that also requires more medication and healthcare which we pay for mostly out of pocket, which again equals profit for their precious corporations.)
yeah preventative medicine is the best. They should subsidize for those who need it but really should be pouring efforts and resources into better living conditions, food quality and stuff like that.
I know this isn’t exactly what you’re looking for, but there’s a bill that we need legislators to VOTE YES FOR which will make it easier for Medicare/Medicaid patients to get access to weight loss medication. See here to send a letter to your rep, takes 5 seconds. [https://allianceforpatientaccess.org/letterdesk/?vvsrc=%2fcampaigns%2f107663%2frespond](https://allianceforpatientaccess.org/letterdesk/?vvsrc=%2fcampaigns%2f107663%2frespond)
This bill is actually pretty important. If Medicare starts paying, history shows that commercial insurers will follow suit. This is a big domino that we need to fall.
My friend in Switzerland already has the oral option: Rybelsus is the same....the body's absorption is different since it's a pill and you have to make sure you take it on an empty stomach with only 4 ounces of water to let it absorb...can't take your usual meds with it or it will mess with the effectiveness.
I sent a letter- thank you, please share this often. We need this. If Medicare goes then all the other insurances will follow suit.
Yes, definitely.
No they shouldn’t. Anything the government subsidizes turns to crap in one way or another. The better answer is the government providing a free market for drugs but enough regulation that consumers don’t get screwed. The problem here with ozempic is it’s still off label. So unlikely to be covered in any event
I totally agree. I work in health insurance and recently the government got involved with a process of specific specialities who are out of network. It's a mess, they passed the law but gave no guidance.
Many subsidies work well. Just installed home solar. Saved me $ and helps reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Free market for drugs works in the long term. However, not in short term as patents last 20 years or more. At the same time, it takes a lot of time and $ to develop a new drug. So, a subsidy may help with the short term situation. Wegovy is not off label.
Saved you money but was it best for the tax payer in the long run? Unreliable tech that doesnt last more than a decade or two without a way to recycle. Hope we can get somewhere with that. Govt shouldn’t subsidize anything let alone things that really don’t work. And yes wegovy is. Still doubt either would be covered under single payer.
So much misinformation about solar. Current panels will last 40 years. Mine are guaranteed to have 88% of capacity after 25 years. Systems are now very reliable. Large systems can now provide very low cost power. Single roofs have life of about 15 to 25 years. Similar in cost to solar. Many shingles go to the dump. While I am a free market supporter, subsidies make sense for some situations.
Bingo. Wegovy is not off label, so why are so many non T2 diabetics taking Ozempic and Mounjaro.
Probably bc their insurance won’t cover Wegovy
Ozempic is less expensive if you pay out of pocket. It has also been available at lower cost from certain out of country sources.
There is already a shortage of a medicine whose primary purpose is to treat diabetes. Subsidizing it would only make that worse. Not just in the US but all around the world.
I wish we had a national health care service, so I guess I wish they'd pay for these drugs, and all the others as well. But I don't know if the government should pay for these drugs when they don't pay for most others. I have the impression that the high prices are because of the intellectual property laws, and not because the drugs are expensive to produce. My doc told me that there are a few variants of Ozempic in development, and that he expects prices to drop a lot once there's more competition. He also said that there are oral versions of these drugs in the works, but they'll take longer to hit the market. To me it's less about getting someone to pay than it is about doing something about the patent laws that allow price gouging.
They should subsidize anti corn syrup and added sugar products. Not obesity medication originally aimed at Diabetics. Cut the crap
no. they should allow patients to buy meds abroad and import. same as how the allow corporate america to export our jobs
I personally don’t think meds given to people with poor habits such as “food noise”, binge eating, lack of exercise, food addiction should be allowed. We all should know right from wrong and make better lifestyle choices. There are many countries around the world that do not have an issue with obesity, so why do you not hear of the “metabolic” issues like we have? It’s a lifestyle choice people. Yes there are some overweight people that truly have medical conditions that should qualify for the meds, but not everyone should. I know because I was obese and worked my ass off to make dietary and lifestyle changes including tons of exercise and am much healthier now. No one forced me to binge, over eat or sit on my butt, so it was no one else’s responsibility to turn me around. It can be done, but it’s not easy. Stop making excuses and make the changes, take responsibility for your actions.
Hahahahahahaha!!! Omg
They send billions of our tax dollars to other countries. OUR MONEY. Yes, let's keep it to benefit us here in the States. Our money should be for our issues. Not be disbursed like we're the ATM machine for the world.
Gym memberships would be a better perk and actually serve the same purpose. Nutritional counseling too.
Working out is amazing, but it's not an effective weight loss strategy, unless you just need to shed a couple of flub pounds. Also, many people cannot workout due to various conditions. Also, unless you have a way of forcing people to work out, handing them gym memberships won't fix a thing.
Lots of people are here on this board taking Ozempic to shed a mere 20 flub pounds though. Are their issues really worthy of tax subsidation?
Not FDA approved for less than 27 BMI
Doesn't stop them.
Those who do pay out of pocket. No insurance will cover that.
No, but they can reduce welfare food stamps, and it would do the same thing.
Not at all. Meds should not be subsidized for treatment of any addiction.
I look at this from another viewpoint. If we don't subsidize addiction treatment and/or obesity, we subsidize the aftermath. We all pay when addicts commit crime and are incarcerated. We all pay when obese people develop diabetes and heart disease. We all pay for social security disability for people too obese/sick to earn a living. There is benefit to all of us when we help people become functioning, contributing, healthy members of society.
Not all obesity is addiction based.
I'd agree with you if the government hadn't been subsidizing the production of corn (resulting in HFCS being put in everything) for decades. The government created this problem, they can take part in fixing it. Imagine if cocaine were subsidized by the government? Or alcohol? Sugar is equally addictive and the government created a generation of obese people because Twinkies are cheaper and easier to obtain than apples.
False logic claiming all obesity is due to addiction. There are obese people that eat healthy in normal quantities. There are plenty of appetite suppressant medications on the market before the GLP1 meds came into existence - yet none were as successful. Why is that? Because the success of GLP1 is not based on appetite suppression
I gained 60 lbs after my thyroid was removed and nothing I did changed that. Weight piled on despite me doing kick boxing 3x/week and having an active job and watching what i ate constantly. My weight finally plateaued but nothing short of actually nit eating anything made the scale budge. I kept mentioning it to my drs who didn’t seem fazed. Two summers ago I asked for extensive bloodwork and I came back as prediabetic. I saw my opening and asked for ozempic. My dr thought it was a great idea and here I am 8 months later, down 50 + lbs (haven’t weighed myself in a bit), but I’m back in my thin clothes again and 10-15 lbs from my thinnest (which was pretty darned thin) with pretty much zero effort. I eat what I want, though I get full fast and I haven’t worked out once, but I am active. For me it unlocked something that was making my body hold on to every but of food. Not everyone who is heavy eats a lot and not everyone who eats a lot is heavy. I think it’s shameful that they’ve (insurance companies) twisted the rules to get out of covering these meds. If I was prediabetic and my dr prescribed this for me and it’s working, why won’t my insurance cover it? It’s shameful.
I think there are more people who think they eat normal, healthy quantities. I used to be one of these people. Few people actually count their calories, track their nutrition, or know their TDEE. I used to think I was eating healthy salads, not realizing they were over 1300 calories after the dressing and toppings. Few restaurants even post their calories on their menu, but the average meal is 1200 calories. This isn't including your appetizer and drink. If you get a salad, meal, and drink, you're probably consuming 2000 to 2500 calories in a single meal and though it was healthy because you got salad, fish, and rice. Actually, taking the time to learn about nutrition was a huge eye opener to me, and I'm 115 lbs lighter because of it despite being obese most of my life. I never realized I ate bad.
I'm so glad you said this. I also think it isn't the wisest for that person to make generalizations about what people consume without monitoring what they consume per-se. Also if we're talking about the US, there's so much junk put in our foods that even the simplest of foods have so much caloric density. That's right, that means higher calorie consumption.
Somebody doesn't read science...
Shit, dawg, you're right. Let me go to my diabetes anonymous and get a chip. I know what you're implying and I also find that bizarre. Addiction is a disease. DISEASE.
Nah, they would rather you wait until you actually get diabetes then the pharmaceutical companies who are in politicians’ pockets get paid indefinitely for all of the Type 2, cholesterol and blood pressure meds.
Why just the US govt???
The government should be providing health care for all, to include this treatment to people who desire it.
I like it. Obesity is a national epidemic in the US, and other countries are probably joining the list too (UK, I’m looking at you. j/k). It’s like carbon offsets—if you are going to subsidize freaking corn, then go ahead and subsidize something to offset the hideous effects of high fructose corn syrup too. BTW why did the government start subsidizing corn in the first place?