Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sun, Feb-11-24, 02:46
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,768
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default Weight-loss drugs need to become cheaper, says AstraZeneca boss

Quote:
Weight-loss drugs need to become cheaper, says AstraZeneca boss

Loss of muscle mass also flagged, as UK drugmaker works with China’s Eccogene on obesity and type 2 diabetes pill


Weight-loss treatments need to become cheaper and easier to take and lead to less reduction in muscle mass, according to the chief executive of AstraZeneca, which is working with a Chinese company to develop a pill to tackle obesity and type 2 diabetes.

In November, Britain’s biggest drugmaker struck an exclusive licence agreement with Shanghai-based Eccogene, for an experimental drug called ECC5004 that would also treat cardiometabolic conditions such as heart disease and stroke. Obesity and diabetes affect more than 1 billion people globally.

Eccogene has conducted a four-week initial study involving healthy people and those with type 2 diabetes, and with AstraZeneca it is analysing the data. The two companies are planning intermediate trials this year in people who have the condition or are overweight.

AstraZeneca is seeking to catch up with Denmark’s Novo Nordisk and the US drugmaker Eli Lilly, both of whom have experienced soaring demand for their weight loss and diabetes drugs. Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy and Ozempic, and Eli Lilly’s Mounjaro and Zepbound are injected by users once a week and have helped some people lose significant amounts of weight but can cause unpleasant side-effects such as nausea.

Pascal Soriot, AstraZeneca’s chief executive, said: “Novo and Eli Lilly are doing a great job. The next step is to improve the quality of weight loss to more fat loss and less muscle loss, and how do you make it cheaper.”

He said the current drugs led to the loss of muscle mass as well as fat, and when people stopped taking them, they often regained weight quickly, gaining fat rather than rebuilding muscle. The challenge was to make weight loss “more durable and such that you lose more fat and less muscle”, Soriot said.

By developing a pill that is taken once a day, AstraZeneca hopes to make it easier to use and accessible to “many people outside the western world”, as well as lower the cost. A pill would be far cheaper to produce than the injections, which come in pre-filled plastic pens.

Wegovy’s NHS list price in the UK is £73.25 for a month’s supply, while in the US, the list price for the same amount is $1,349.02 (£1070.50).

Like the injectable treatments, the pill is a GLP-1 agonist, which mimics the action of a hormone that is naturally released by the stomach when people eat food. The drugs suppress appetite and slow the movement of food through the digestive system, so people feel full faster and for longer. AstraZeneca will also test the drug in combination with other medicines for a range of cardiometabolic diseases.

Sharon Barr, who runs the drugmaker’s biopharmaceuticals research and development arm, said: “We view this as a mechanism to promote general health and organ protection in interrelated cardio-vascular, renal and metabolic disease.”

The company has two other injectable anti-obesity drugs in early-stage development.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...y-diabetes-pill
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sun, Feb-11-24, 07:56
Dodger's Avatar
Dodger Dodger is offline
Posts: 8,767
 
Plan: Paleoish/Keto
Stats: 225/167/175 Male 71.5 inches
BF:18%
Progress: 116%
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Default

As far as I know, using muscles is the only way to keep them. I do wonder if the rapid weight loss and associated muscle loss also cause some heart muscle loss.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, Feb-11-24, 19:45
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,044
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Pretty good formula for a business in an extremely toxic food environment. Create a pill that treats symptoms of the most common diseases, lower the price, and eliminate all reasons for embracing a healthy lifestyle. Further, eliminate all reasons to truly understand how to define a healthy lifestyle in order to live in a healthy manner. We live in a very distorted world.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Feb-13-24, 09:25
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodger
As far as I know, using muscles is the only way to keep them. I do wonder if the rapid weight loss and associated muscle loss also cause some heart muscle loss.


I can almost guarantee you that it does cause heart muscle loss, and considering how much muscle they lose overall, it's probably pretty bad. (The Kimkins era showed quite clearly that muscle loss during rapid weight loss does not discriminate between muscle no longer needed in the legs to support excess weight, and heart muscle still needed to support LIFE.)

I can't personally figure out how they can manage to circumvent that muscle loss with exercise, since the drugs slow down digestion so much that they feel over-full after just a very small meal. And who can exercise when their stomach feels overly full? The idea that they need to concentrate on easy to digest foods (mostly carbs in general) means that they're getting very little protein - not likely nearly enough to help sustain muscle mass.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Feb-14-24, 18:20
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I personally think they really do need to lower the price, at least in the US because the price is absolutely outrageous:

Quote:
Wegovy’s NHS list price in the UK is £73.25 for a month’s supply, while in the US, the list price for the same amount is $1,349.02 (£1070.50).


There is no reason they need to charge that much in the US if the NHS can somehow magically list it at approximately 1/14 the price.



Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
Pretty good formula for a business in an extremely toxic food environment. Create a pill that treats symptoms of the most common diseases, lower the price, and eliminate all reasons for embracing a healthy lifestyle. Further, eliminate all reasons to truly understand how to define a healthy lifestyle in order to live in a healthy manner. We live in a very distorted world.


This is true - but what's considered to be a healthy diet changes in infinitesimally small increments, and at a snail's pace.

The Food Pyramid in the 90's recommended 6-11 servings of grain daily. The current My Plate still recommends 6 servings of grains, but has reduced the upper limit to 7 servings. (And look how many years for them to reduce the upper limit that much)

For fruits and vegetables - at least some versions of the food pyramid are now saying that potatoes don't count as a veggie, whereas on the food pyramid potatoes were considered to be just as nutritious in the veggie section as spinach and broccoli.

There's a possibility that potatoes may actually be reclassified as a grain for the 2025 dietary Guidelines ( https://forum.lowcarber.org/showthr...684#post9457684 )

There's a long way to go to improve the Dietary Guidelines, and it may never be a healthy diet in my lifetime, but these few small changes are at least moving in the right direction.





As far as the weight loss drugs in development that are also supposed to treat coronary issues, I think they really do need the drugs to treat the problems associated with such an upside down diet too - once you develop those problems, switching to a healthier diet (assuming what's considered to be a "healthy" diet IS actually a healthy diet) the problems may go away... but they may not. Some of those conditions cause permanent damage that will need to be treated for a lifetime.

Even if they do go away, the damage those conditions caused may not ever go away, and will require treatment for life.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sun, Feb-18-24, 14:27
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I thought sure I'd read something on here about NC employees being denied weight loss drugs, but this seemed like the most likely place to put another article on that topic. (can't find the old article now - please move if this is not an appropriate place for it)

Quote:

Healthcare
2 major employers said they stopped paying for weight-loss drugs like Wegovy after the drugmaker threatened to penalize them
Shelby Livingston
Feb 16, 2024, 9:47 AM EST


There's a little-known reason more companies aren't paying for their workers' weight-loss shots.

Sure, the drugs cost a lot. For many employers, paying for the $1,000-a-month shots for the vast numbers of workers with obesity or overweight could put them out of business.

But there's something else standing in the way: Novo Nordisk, the maker of wildly popular weight-loss shots like Wegovy, is penalizing employers for trying to limit use of the drugs, even a little bit.

It’s a dilemma that's forced at least two frustrated employers in Texas and North Carolina to scrap weight-loss drug coverage altogether, leaving workers who need obesity treatment to foot the bill themselves or go without.

Employers hire middlemen called pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to negotiate drug discounts, called rebates, from pharmaceutical companies. In exchange for the discounts, PBMs agree to cover those drugs. Wegovy, which has a list price of $1,350 a month, can fetch deep discounts of up to 50%. But even at a reduced price, weight-loss drugs are budget-busting, so employers have tried to make them tougher to get.


Now, some employers and health plans said they were warned they have to pay for the drugs for all eligible people or they’ll lose those important discounts they rely on to make the drugs cheaper in the first place.
Health plans in North Carolina and Texas faced the loss of drug discounts

Take North Carolina’s insurance plan for state employees. The state health plan’s costs for weight-loss drugs like Wegovy, known as GLP-1s, skyrocketed to more than $100 million in 2023 from about $34 million in 2021 after about 25,000 employees filled prescriptions.

Unable to afford that bill without huge premium increases, plan officials rushed to find a way to stop the bleeding. They came up with a few options. The plan could restrict the shots to only people with the most severe obesity. Or it could require patients to try a cheaper weight-loss drug before resorting to more expensive options. It also considered requiring patients to see a doctor board-certified in obesity medicine if they wanted a weight-loss shot.

However, according to plan officials, the state health plan’s PBM, CVS Caremark, said it would lose tens of millions of dollars in discounts from Novo Nordisk if it implemented any of these strategies.


Plan officials said that losing those discounts would raise the price of Wegovy and wipe out a big chunk of the savings North Carolina hoped to realize by limiting use.

Sam Watts, the state health plan's administrator, said during a board meeting on January 25 that Novo Nordisk and its contracts with CVS "are preventing us from providing access to members who need it most."

Out of options, the state health plan threw in the towel and voted to end coverage of weight-loss drugs for all workers, starting April 1.

A similar situation occurred in Texas last year. The University of Texas System, facing a bill of more than $5 million a month for its workers’ weight-loss drugs, explored saving some money by paying only for people already on the drugs. It would exclude coverage for new users. But it was told by Novo Nordisk and its PBM, Express Scripts, that it would lose discounts for weight-loss drugs, including for the workers still using them, draining much of the cost savings, a UT System benefits leader confirmed to Business

UT System ended all coverage for GLP-1 weight-loss drugs in September 2023.
Novo Nordisk has little reason to play ball with employers

Managing workers’ use of prescription drugs is a foundational part of what PBMs do. If employers can’t get creative by adding prior authorization requirements or other restrictions to reduce costs, most won’t be able to afford covering drugs like Wegovy, said Chris Brown, an independent pharmacy benefit consultant.

A spokesperson for Novo Nordisk said it was “irresponsible” to deny patients insurance coverage for obesity treatment. The drugmaker “strongly opposes creating new hurdles for patient access to care” and continues to work with North Carolina’s state health plan and its PBM to address concerns about cost, the spokesperson said.

Still, Novo Nordisk doesn’t have much reason to play nice with employers. It doesn’t need their business, at least for now, since it’s selling weight-loss shots faster than it can make them. The drugmaker’s sales for GLP-1s like Ozempic and Wegovy soared 52% in 2023 to about $18 billion.


The PBMs CVS and Express Scripts provided statements blaming Novo Nordisk for high drug prices. They said they aim to get lower prices or help employers better predict their costs.

“Monopolistic price-gouging by some drug manufacturers has unfairly forced employers and other health plan sponsors to make difficult decisions about whether to cover GLP-1s,” an Express Scripts spokesperson said.

“Drug manufacturers need to stop dragging their feet and agree to offer their medicines at a fair price to North Carolina’s public servants,” a CVS spokesperson said.

He added that CVS collects rebates from drugmakers when coverage for a drug meets certain terms and conditions, and it passes along all rebates it gets to North Carolina’s state health plan.


But Brown, the consultant, said he wonders just how hard the PBMs are fighting for their clients. PBMs make money by pocketing a cut of the rebates and other money they negotiate before passing that money along to employers — and they’ve faced much scrutiny for this.

He said it’s possible that to get those rebates and secure their cut, the PBMs agreed to contracts with Novo Nordisk that limited their ability to help employers manage the use of weight-loss drugs without forfeiting discounts. He’s seen this play out in PBM negotiations over other drugs.

“It’s hard to defend as a pharmacy benefit manager because it's antithetical to what they say their business is,” Brown said. “But it makes a heck of a lot of sense if you're trying to drive rebates.”





https://www.businessinsider.com/weg...%2018,%20202 4
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Sun, Feb-18-24, 16:02
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
Posts: 13,444
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

I mentioned the NC State Employee health care in this post https://forum.lowcarber.org/showpos...5&postcount=104
And also #114 in same thread. The articles were in local papers, better to keep your comment here. this from a TV station.
https://www.wral.com/story/nc-state...drugs/21252674/
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sun, Feb-18-24, 18:13
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Thanks, JEY - I knew I'd seen something about it somewhere on here.

The thing is, I go back to this:
Quote:
Wegovy’s NHS list price in the UK is £73.25 for a month’s supply, while in the US, the list price for the same amount is $1,349.02 (£1070.50).


Because of this:
Quote:
A spokesperson for Novo Nordisk said it was “irresponsible” to deny patients insurance coverage for obesity treatment. The drugmaker “strongly opposes creating new hurdles for patient access to care” and continues to work with North Carolina’s state health plan and its PBM to address concerns about cost, the spokesperson said.

Still, Novo Nordisk doesn’t have much reason to play nice with employers. It doesn’t need their business, at least for now, since it’s selling weight-loss shots faster than it can make them. The drugmaker’s sales for GLP-1s like Ozempic and Wegovy soared 52% in 2023 to about $18 billion.


The PBMs CVS and Express Scripts provided statements blaming Novo Nordisk for high drug prices. They said they aim to get lower prices or help employers better predict their costs.

“Monopolistic price-gouging by some drug manufacturers has unfairly forced employers and other health plan sponsors to make difficult decisions about whether to cover GLP-1s,” an Express Scripts spokesperson said.

“Drug manufacturers need to stop dragging their feet and agree to offer their medicines at a fair price to North Carolina’s public servants,” a CVS spokesperson said.



Not that I like seeing so many people on what is potentially a very damaging drug - its the price gouging that really bothers me, because these people are desperate to lose weight, and No-Nor knows it, so they're taking advantage of it.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Mon, Feb-19-24, 13:45
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I don't actually subscribe to Reddit, but you know how it is if you read anything on there - and then read more in that category? I've been reading a lot of stuff on the r/Walmart section, and a someone showed a photo of a shelf with Doritos and complained that the price had gone up so much - $2.58 for a small bag of Doritos.

A couple of the comments on it:

Quote:
At this rate we aren't going to need Ozempic because snacking will become a thing of the past.


Quote:
Yeah. High prices like this have pushed me to look at healthier and cheaper options. If I really want chips or crackers I'll just buy a full size bag and put some in baggies for breaks.


Quote:
Yep I just stopped buying most junk food. I'm not paying out of the ass to excellerate my demise. They can *** ** ***


Quote:
DONTritos


At least there's a few people who have decided junk food isn't worth it.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Mon, Feb-19-24, 14:08
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,044
 
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
Pretty good formula for a business in an extremely toxic food environment. Create a pill that treats symptoms of the most common diseases, lower the price, and eliminate all reasons for embracing a healthy lifestyle. Further, eliminate all reasons to truly understand how to define a healthy lifestyle in order to live in a healthy manner. We live in a very distorted world.



This is true - but what's considered to be a healthy diet changes in infinitesimally small increments, and at a snail's pace.

The Food Pyramid in the 90's recommended 6-11 servings of grain daily. The current My Plate still recommends 6 servings of grains, but has reduced the upper limit to 7 servings. (And look how many years for them to reduce the upper limit that much)

For fruits and vegetables - at least some versions of the food pyramid are now saying that potatoes don't count as a veggie, whereas on the food pyramid potatoes were considered to be just as nutritious in the veggie section as spinach and broccoli.

There's a possibility that potatoes may actually be reclassified as a grain for the 2025 dietary Guidelines ( https://forum.lowcarber.org/showthr...684#post9457684 )

There's a long way to go to improve the Dietary Guidelines, and it may never be a healthy diet in my lifetime, but these few small changes are at least moving in the right direction.

Calianna, with due respect, you missed my point completely. My statement was one that observes the tendency in our current medical society to treat symptoms, not root causes. Therefore, when treating symptoms, whatever they may be, the person taking the prescription is not getting healthy; rather, they're simply "kicking the can down the road." Instead, if people learned how to eat and live to achieve health through lifestyle practices, they would be addressing root causes, not symptoms, and avoiding the side effects that come with the ineffective pills and shots designed to treat symptoms. The dilemma is that due to so many different ways of defining what constitutes healthy eating, there are no clear and agreed upon guidelines. The result is mass confusion. The DGAs are useless and ineffective and often unhealthy for many when followed. Attempting to change the DGAs has become a war of dietary politics. People must learn how to eat to for themselves to realize better health, and this is difficult for many individuals.

The gross distortion comes from the pharmaceutical and medical companies telling people they can be treated with pills and shots that may help them achieve a noticeable difference in a mirror, on a scale, meter, or other "test of symptoms," but that difference is often continued poor health and a greatly reduced health span. Then consider the food companies who advertise healthy foods that are anything but. It's a confusing world out there, and those that do best are those who perform their own research and N=1 studies to learn exactly what works for them. Many are not willing or able to do that.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Mon, Feb-19-24, 19:46
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,901
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
Calianna, with due respect, you missed my point completely. My statement was one that observes the tendency in our current medical society to treat symptoms, not root causes. Therefore, when treating symptoms, whatever they may be, the person taking the prescription is not getting healthy; rather, they're simply "kicking the can down the road." Instead, if people learned how to eat and live to achieve health through lifestyle practices, they would be addressing root causes, not symptoms, and avoiding the side effects that come with the ineffective pills and shots designed to treat symptoms. The dilemma is that due to so many different ways of defining what constitutes healthy eating, there are no clear and agreed upon guidelines. The result is mass confusion. The DGAs are useless and ineffective and often unhealthy for many when followed. Attempting to change the DGAs has become a war of dietary politics. People must learn how to eat to for themselves to realize better health, and this is difficult for many individuals.

The gross distortion comes from the pharmaceutical and medical companies telling people they can be treated with pills and shots that may help them achieve a noticeable difference in a mirror, on a scale, meter, or other "test of symptoms," but that difference is often continued poor health and a greatly reduced health span. Then consider the food companies who advertise healthy foods that are anything but. It's a confusing world out there, and those that do best are those who perform their own research and N=1 studies to learn exactly what works for them. Many are not willing or able to do that.
'

Sorry to misunderstand - I probably should have said that there's the *official* healthy way to eat (low fat, minimal protein, 300 g carbs daily) - and that IMO is the primary problem, because I really do see that there's a whole political and money trail involved in the DGAs.

The pharmaceutical companies see the health problems (whether the problems stemmed from diet, lifestyle, or were of genetic, viral, or bacterial origin) and develop drugs to address those problems. That's their entire business model - produce drugs to address health problems. (and often produce more drugs to deal with the side effects of other drugs, but that's getting into another whole matter) It's not their job to figure out where the health problems came from to begin with, nor is it their job to research what is truly the healthiest diet and lifestyle advice - that comes from the panels doling out dietary and lifestyle advice. (which is then passed on to Dr's and nutritionists and journalists and then the general public hears the official advice from all these authorities and assume they must know what's best)

All the other ways of eating (various versions of low carb, keto etc) are always almost immediately and universally *officially* dismissed as dangerous by the ones who come up with the DGA (and the Drs and nutritionists), or at best are only deemed viable for a short amount of time before they become dangerous. Then you need to go right back to the DGA's because that's the *official* healthy diet.

Never mind that the *officially* healthy way to eat will eventually put so many people in need of shots and pills and surgeries to deal with the problems that the DGAs create. (And that's just the ones who follow the DGAs - the ones who end up with with the worst problems the fastest are the ones who just eat whatever junk food is handy or sounds good: burgers and extra large fries washed down with 2 liters of sugary soda every single day, or a diet of donuts, cookies, chips, and candy washed down with Starbucks coffee shakes and energy drinks)

You're exactly right that those who work on figuring out what diet works best for them will do better - but it does take a lot of time and effort, plus determination to do that. And you're also quite right that most people either don't know how to do that or aren't willing to go to the bother - they have other priorities that occupy their time and their minds, and as far as they're concerned, everything is fine until they end up with a problem, and any problems they end up with are not really their problem to deal with - it's up to the Dr's to reach into their bag of drugs and fix the problem. They go into the Dr's exam room with the attitude of "I feel really terrible -YOU need to do something to fix it" instead of "I really messed up and now I feel terrible, please tell me what can I do to feel better"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:25.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.