Decoding Hormone Balancing in Ads

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

It’s Q&A Time!

This is the bit whereby each week, we respond to subscriber questions/requests/etc

Have something you’d like to ask us, or ask us to look into? Hit reply to any of our emails, or use the feedback widget at the bottom, and a Real Human™ will be glad to read it!

Q: As to specific health topics, I would love to see someone address all these Instagram ads targeted to women that claim “You only need to ‘balance your hormones’ to lose weight, get ripped, etc.” What does this mean? Which hormones are they all talking about? They all seem to be selling a workout program and/or supplements or something similar, as they are ads, after all. Is there any science behind this stuff or is it mostly hot air, as I suspect?

Thank you for asking this, as your question prompted yesterday’s main feature, What Does “Balancing Your Hormones” Even Mean?

That’s a great suggestion also about addressing ads (and goes for health-related things in general, not just hormonal stuff) and examining their claims, what they mean, how they work (if they work!), and what’s “technically true but may be misleading* cause confusion”

*We don’t want companies to sue us, of course.

Only, we’re going to need your help for this one, subscribers!

See, here at 10almonds we practice what we preach. We limit screen time, we focus on our work when working, and simply put, we don’t see as many ads as our thousands of subscribers do. Also, ads tend to be targeted to the individual, and often vary from country to country, so chances are good that we’re not seeing the same ads that you’re seeing.

So, how about we pull together as a bit of a 10almonds community project?

  • Step 1: add our email address to your contacts list, if you haven’t already
  • Step 2: When you see an ad you’re curious about, select “share” (there is usually an option to share ads, but if not, feel free to screenshot or such)
  • Step 3: Send the ad to us by email

We’ll do the rest! Whenever we have enough ads to review, we’ll do a special on the topic.

We will categorically not be able to do this without you, so please do join in—Many thanks in advance!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • All About Olive Oil
  • Delay Ageing – by Dr. Colin Rose
    Dr. Rose’s ‘Delay Ageing’ delves into cutting-edge research on tackling aging with lifestyle interventions, from diet to nutraceuticals, offering precise, actionable health strategies.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Can you ‘boost’ your immune system?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    As flu season and a likely winter COVID-19 wave approach, you may encounter both proven and unproven methods claiming to “boost” your immune system. Before you reach for supplements, learn more about how the immune system works, how vaccines give us the best protection against many illnesses, and how some lifestyle factors can help your immune system function properly.

    What is the immune system?

    The immune system is the body’s first line of defense against invaders like viruses, bacteria, or fungi. You develop immunity—or protection from infection—when your immune system has learned how to recognize an invader and attack it before it makes you sick.

    How can you boost your immune system?

    You can teach your immune system how to fight back against dangerous invaders by staying up to date on vaccines. This season’s updated flu and COVID-19 vaccines target newer variants and are recommended for everyone 6 months and older.

    Vaccines reduce your risk of getting sick and spreading illness to others. Even if you get infected with a disease after you’ve been vaccinated against it, the vaccine will still increase protection against severe illness, hospitalization, and death.

    People who have compromised immune systems due to certain health conditions or because they need to take immunosuppressant medications may need additional vaccine doses.

    Find out which vaccines you and your children need by using the CDC’s Adult Vaccine Assessment Tool and Child and Adolescent Vaccine Assessment Tool. Talk to your health care provider about the best vaccines for your family. 

    Find pharmacies offering updated flu and COVID-19 vaccines by visiting Vaccines.gov.

    Can supplements boost your immune system?

    Many vitamin, mineral, and herbal supplements that are marketed as “immune boosting” have little to no effect on your immune system. Research is split on whether some of these supplements—like vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc—are capable of helping your body fight infections.

    Plus, the Food and Drug Administration typically does not review supplements until after they have reached store shelves, and companies can sell supplements without notifying the FDA. This means that supplements may not be accurately labeled.

    Eating a diverse diet rich in fruits and vegetables is the best way for most people to absorb nutrients that support optimal immune system function. People with certain health conditions and deficiencies may need specific supplements prescribed by a health care provider. For example, people with anemia may need iron supplements in order to maintain appropriate iron levels.

    Before you begin taking a new supplement, talk to your health care provider, as some supplements may interact with medications you are taking or worsen certain health conditions.

    Can lifestyle factors strengthen your immune system?

    Based on current evidence, there is no direct link between lifestyle changes and enhanced immunity to infections. However, maintaining a healthy lifestyle through the following practices can help ensure that your immune system functions as it should:

    Taking steps to avoid contact with germs also reduces your risk of getting sick. Safer sex barriers like condoms protect against HIV, while wearing a high-quality, well-fitting mask—especially in high-risk environments—protects against COVID-19. Both of these illnesses can reduce your production of white blood cells, which protect against infection. 

    For more information, talk to your health care provider.

    This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Share This Post

  • Long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Many women worry hormonal contraceptives have dangerous side-effects including increased cancer risk. But this perception is often out of proportion with the actual risks.

    So, what does the research actually say about cancer risk for contraceptive users?

    And is your cancer risk different if, instead of the pill, you use long-acting reversible contraceptives? These include intrauterine devices or IUDs (such as Mirena), implants under the skin (such as Implanon), and injections (such as Depo Provera).

    Our new study, conducted by the University of Queensland and QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute and published by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, looked at this question.

    We found long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk (which is good news) but not necessarily any safer than the pill.

    Peakstock/Shutterstock
    A woman gets a hormonal birth control product implant
    Some hormonal contraceptives take the form of implants under the skin. WiP-Studio/Shutterstock

    How does the contraceptive pill affect cancer risk?

    The International Agency for Research on Cancer, which compiles evidence on cancer causes, has concluded that oral contraceptives have mixed effects on cancer risk.

    Using the oral contraceptive pill:

    • slightly increases your risk of breast and cervical cancer in the short term, but
    • substantially reduces your risk of cancers of the uterus and ovaries in the longer term.

    Our earlier work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to.

    In previous research we estimated that in 2010, oral contraceptive pill use prevented over 1,300 cases of endometrial and ovarian cancers in Australian women.

    It also prevented almost 500 deaths from these cancers in 2013. This is a reduction of around 25% in the deaths that could have occurred that year if women hadn’t taken the pill.

    In contrast, we calculated the pill may have contributed to around 15 deaths from breast cancer in 2013, which is less than 0.5% of all breast cancer deaths in that year.

    A woman pops contraceptive pills from a pill pack.
    Previous work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to. Image Point Fr

    What about long-acting reversible contraceptives and cancer risk?

    Long-acting reversible contraceptives – which include intrauterine devices or IUDs, implants under the skin, and injections – release progesterone-like hormones.

    These are very effective contraceptives that can last from a few months (injections) up to seven years (intrauterine devices).

    Notably, they don’t contain the hormone oestrogen, which may be responsible for some of the side-effects of the pill (including perhaps contributing to a higher risk of breast cancer).

    Use of these long-acting contraceptives has doubled over the past decade, while the use of the pill has declined. So it’s important to know whether this change could affect cancer risk for Australian women.

    Our new study of more than 1 million Australian women investigated whether long-acting, reversible contraceptives affect risk of invasive cancers. We compared the results to the oral contraceptive pill.

    We used de-identified health records for Australian women aged 55 and under in 2002.

    Among this group, about 176,000 were diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2013 when the oldest women were aged 67. We compared hormonal contraceptive use among these women who got cancer to women without cancer.

    We found that long-term users of all types of hormonal contraception had around a 70% lower risk of developing endometrial cancer in the years after use. In other words, the risk of developing endometrial cancer is substantially lower among women who took hormonal contraception compared to those who didn’t.

    For ovarian cancer, we saw a 50% reduced risk (compared to those who took no hormonal contraception) for women who were long-term users of the hormone-containing IUD.

    The risk reduction was not as marked for the implants or injections, however few long-term users of these products developed these cancers in our study.

    As the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers increases with age, it will be important to look at cancer risk in these women as they get older.

    What about breast cancer risk?

    Our findings suggest that the risk of breast cancer for current users of long-acting contraceptives is similar to users of the pill.

    However, the contraceptive injection was only associated with an increase in breast cancer risk after five years of use and there was no longer a higher risk once women stopped using them.

    Our results suggested that the risk of breast cancer also reduces after stopping use of the contraceptive implants.

    We will need to follow-up the women for longer to determine whether this is also the case for the IUD.

    It is worth emphasising that the breast cancer risk associated with all hormonal contraceptives is very small.

    About 30 in every 100,000 women aged 20 to 39 years develop breast cancer each year, and any hormonal contraceptive use would only increase this to around 36 cases per 100,000.

    What about other cancers?

    Our study did not show any consistent relationships between contraceptive use and other cancers types. However, we only at looked at invasive cancers (meaning those that start at a primary site but have the potential to spread to other parts of the body).

    A recent French study found that prolonged use of the contraceptive injection increased the risk of meningioma (a type of benign brain tumour).

    However, meningiomas are rare, especially in young women. There are around two cases in every 100,000 in women aged 20–39, so the extra number of cases linked to contraceptive injection use was small.

    The French study found the hormonal IUD did not increase meningioma risk (and they did not investigate contraceptive implants).

    Benefits and side-effects

    There are benefits and side-effects for all medicines, including contraceptives, but it is important to know most very serious side-effects are rare.

    A conversation with your doctor about the balance of benefits and side-effects for you is always a good place to start.

    Susan Jordan, Professor of Epidemiology, The University of Queensland; Karen Tuesley, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, and Penny Webb, Distinguished Scientist, Gynaecological Cancers Group, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Can You Shrink A Waist In Seven Days?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    We don’t usually do this sort of video, but it seems timely before the new year. The exercises shown here are very good, and the small dietary tweak is what makes it work:

    The method

    Firstly, the small dietary tweak is: abstaining from foods that cause bloating, such as flour and dairy. She does say “брожение” (fermentation), but we don’t really use the word that way in English. On which note: she is Ukrainian and speaking Russian (context: many Ukrainians grew up speaking both languages), so you will need the subtitles on if you don’t understand Russian, but a) it’s worth it b) the subtitles have been put in manually so they’re a respectable translation.

    Secondly, spoiler, she loses about 2 inches.

    The exercises are:

    1. Pelvic swing-thrusts: sit, supporting yourself on your hands with your butt off the floor; raise your pelvis up to a table position, do 30 repetitions.
    2. Leg raises in high plank: perform 20 lifts per leg, each to its side.
    3. Leg raises (lying on back): do 20 repetitions.
    4. V-crunches: perform 30 repetitions.
    5. V-twists: lean on hands and do 25 repetitions.

    These exercises (all five done daily for the 7 days) are great for core strength, and core muscletone is what keeps your innards in place, rather than letting them drop down (and out).

    Thus, there’s only a small amount of actual fat loss going on here (if any), but it slims the waistline by improving muscletone and simultaneously decreasing bloating, which are both good changes.

    For more on all of these plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Visceral Belly Fat & How To Lose It

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • All About Olive Oil
  • Blind Spots – by Dr. Marty Makary

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    From the time the US recommended not giving peanuts to infants for the first three years of life “in order to avoid peanut allergies” (whereupon non-exposure to peanuts early in life led to, instead, an increase in peanut allergies and anaphylactic incidents), to the time the US recommended not taking HRT on the strength of the claim that “HRT causes breast cancer” (whereupon the reduced popularity of HRT led to, instead, an increase in breast cancer incidence and mortality), to many other such incidents of very bad public advice being given on the strength of a single badly-misrepresented study (for each respective thing), Dr. Makary puts the spotlight on what went wrong.

    This is important, because this is not just a book of outrage, exclaiming “how could this happen?!”, but rather instead, is a book of inquisition, asking “how did this happen?”, in such a way that we the reader can spot similar patterns going forwards.

    Oftentimes, this is a simple matter of having a basic understanding of statistics, and checking sources to see if the dataset really supports what the headlines are claiming—and indeed, whether sometimes it suggests rather the opposite.

    The style is a little on the sensationalist side, but it’s well-supported with sound arguments, good science, and clear mathematics.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to improve your scientific literacy, this book is an excellent illustrative guide.

    Click here to check out Blind Spots, and eliminate yours!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • 7 Kinds Of Rest When Sleep Is Not Enough

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Taking Rest Seriously (More Than Just Sleep)

    This is Dr. Matthew Edlund. He has 44 years experience as a psychiatrist, and is also a sleep specialist. He has a holistic view of health, which is reflected in his practice; he advocates for “a more complete health: physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-being”.

    What does he want us to know?

    Sleep, yes

    Sleep cannot do all things for us in terms of rest, but it can do a lot, and it is critical. It is, in short, a necessary-but-not-sufficient condition for being well-rested.

    See also: Why You Probably Need More Sleep

    Rest actively

    Rest is generally thought of as a passive activity, if you’ll pardon the oxymoron. Popular thinking is that it’s not something defined by what we do, so much what we stop doing.

    In contrast, Dr. Edlund argues that to take rest seriously, we need do restful things.

    Rest is as important as eating, and we wouldn’t want for that to “just happen”, would we?

    Dr. Edlund advocates for restful activities such as going to the garden (or a nearby park) to relax. He also suggests we not underestimate the power of sex as an actively restful activity—this one is generally safer in the privacy of one’s home, though!

    Rest physically

    This is about actively relaxing our body—yoga is a great option here, practised in a way that is not physically taxing, but is physically rejuvenating; gentle stretches are key. Without such things, our body will keep tension, and that is not restful.

    For the absolute most restful yogic practice? Check out:

    Non-Sleep Deep Rest: A Neurobiologist’s Take

    this is about yoga nidra!

    Rest mentally

    The flipside of the above is that we do need to rest our mind also. When we try to rest from a mental activity by taking on a different mental activity that uses the same faculties of the brain, it is not restful.

    Writer’s example: as a writer, I could not rest from my writing by writing recreationally, or even by reading. An accountant, however, could absolutely rest from accounting by picking up a good book, should they feel so inclined.

    Rest socially

    While we all have our preferences when it comes to how much or how little social interaction we like in our lives, humans are fundamentally social creatures, and it is hardwired into us by evolution to function at our best in a community.

    This doesn’t mean you have to go out partying every night, but it does mean you should take care to spend at least a little time with friends, even if just once or twice per week, and yes, even if it’s just a videocall (in person is best, but not everyone lives close by!)

    If your social life is feeling a little thin on the ground these days, that’s a very common thing—not only as we get older, but also as many social institutions took a dive in functionality on account of the pandemic, and many are still floundering. Nevertheless, there are more options than you probably realize; yes, even for the naturally reclusive:

    How To Beat Loneliness & Isolation

    Rest spiritually

    Be we religious or not, there are scientifically well-evidenced benefits to religious practices—some are because of the social aspect, and follow on from what we talked about just above. Other benefits come from activities such as prayer or meditation (which means that having some kind of faith, while beneficial, is not actually a requirement for spiritual rest—comparable practices without faith are fine too).

    We discussed the overlapping practices of prayer and meditation, here:

    The Science Of Mantra Meditation

    Rest at home

    Obviously, most people sleep at home. But…

    Busy family homes can sometimes need a bit of conscious effort to create a restful environment, even if just for a while. A family dinner together is one great way to achieve this, and also ties in with the social element we mentioned before!

    A different challenge faced by a lot of older people without live-in families, on the other hand, is the feeling of too much opportunity for rest—and then a feeling of shame for taking it. The view is commonly held that, for example, taking an afternoon nap is a sign of weakness.

    On the contrary: taking an afternoon nap can be a good source of strength! Check out:

    How To Nap Like A Pro (No More “Sleep Hangovers”!)

    Rest at work

    Our readership has a lot of retirees, but we know that’s not the case for everyone. How then, to rest while at work? Ideally we have breaks, of course, but most workplaces do not exactly have an amusement arcade in the break room. Nevertheless, there are some quick resets that can be done easily, anywhere, and (almost) any time:

    Meditation Games: Meditation That You’ll Actually Enjoy

    Want to know more?

    You might also like:

    How To Rest More Efficiently (Yes, Really)

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • The push for Medicare to cover weight-loss drugs: An explainer

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    The largest U.S. insurer, Medicare, does not cover weight-loss drugs, making it tougher for older people to get access to promising new medications.

    If you cover stories about drug costs in the U.S., it’s important to understand why Medicare’s Part D pharmacy program, which covers people aged 65 and older and people with certain disabilities, doesn’t cover weight-loss drugs today. It’s also important to consider what would happen if Medicare did start covering weight loss drugs. This explainer will give you a brief overview of the issues and then summarize some recent publications the benefits and costs of drugs like semaglutide and tirzepatide.

    First, what are these new and newsy weight loss drugs?

    Semaglutide is a medication used for both the treatment of type 2 diabetes and for long-term weight management in adults with obesity. It debuted in the United States in 2017 as an injectable diabetes drug called Ozempic, manufactured by Novo Nordisk. It’s part of a class of drugs that mimics the action of glucagon, a substance that the human body makes to aid digestion. 

    Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) drugs like semaglutide help prompt the body to release insulin. But they also cause a minor delay in the pace of digestion, helping people feel sated after eating.

    That second effect turned Ozempic into a widely used weight-loss drug, even before the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave its okay for this use. Doctors in the United States can prescribe medicines for uses beyond those approved by the FDA. This is known as off-label use.

    In writing about her own experience in using the medicine to help her shed 40 pounds, Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus in June noted that Novo Nordisk mentioned the potential for weight loss in its “ubiquitous cable ads (‘Oh-oh-oh, Ozempic!’)” 

    The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists has reported shortages of semaglutide due to demand, leaving some people with diabetes struggling to find supply of the medicine.

    Novo Nordisk won Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2021 to market semaglutide as an injectable weight loss drug under the name Wegovy, but with a different dosing regimen than Ozempic. Rival Eli Lilly first won FDA approval of its similar GLP-1 diabetes drug, tirzepatide, in the United States in 2022 and sells it under the brand name Mounjaro.

    In November of 2023, Eli Lilly won FDA approval to sell tirzepatide as a weight-loss drug, soon-to-be marketed under the brand name Zepbound. The company said it will set a monthly list price for a month’s supply of the drug at $1,059.87, which the company described as 20% discount to the cost of rival Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy. Wegovy has a list price of $1,349.02, according to the Novo Nordisk website. 

    Even when their insurance plans officially cover costs for weight loss drugs, consumers may face barriers in seeking that coverage for these drugs. Commercial health plans have in place prior authorization requirements to try to limit coverage of new weight-loss shots to those who qualify for these treatments. The Wegovy shot, for example, is intended for people whose weight reaches a certain benchmark for obesity or who are overweight and have a condition related to excess weight, such as diabetes, high blood pressure or high cholesterol.

    State Medicaid programs, meanwhile, have taken approaches that vary by state. For example, the most populous U.S. state, California, provides some coverage to new weight-loss injections through its Medicaid program, but many others, including Texas, the No. 2 state in terms of population,  do not, according to an online tool that Novo Nordisk created to help people check on coverage. 

    Medicare does cover semaglutide for treatment of diabetes, and the insurer reported $3 billion in 2021 spending on the drug under Medicare Part D. Congress last year gave Medicare new tools that might help it try to lower the cost of semaglutide.

    Medicare is in the midst of implementing new authority it gained through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 to negotiate with companies about the cost of certain medicines.

    This legislation gave Medicare, for the first time, tools to directly negotiate with pharmaceutical companies on the cost of some medicines. Congress tailored this program to spare drug makers from negotiations for the first few years they put new medicines on the market, allowing them to recoup investment in these products.

    Why doesn’t Medicare cover weight-loss drugs?

    Congress created the Medicare Part D pharmacy program in 2003 to address a gap in coverage that had existed since the creation of Medicare in 1965. The program long covered the costs of drugs administered by doctors and those given in hospitals, but not the kinds of medicines people took on their own, like Wegovy shots.

    In 2003, there seemed to be good reasons to leave weight-loss drugs out of the benefit, write Inmaculada Hernandez of the University of California, San Diego, and coauthors in their September 2023 editorial in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, “Medicare Part D Coverage of Anti-obesity Medications: a Call for Forward-Looking Policy Reform.”

    When members of Congress worked on the Part D benefit, the drugs available on the market were known to have limited effectiveness and unpleasant side effects. And those members of Congress were aware of how a drug combination called fen-phen, once touted as a weight-loss miracle medicine, turned out in rare cases to cause fatal heart valve damage. In 1997, American Home Products, which later became Wyeth, took its fen-phen product off the market.

    But today GLP-1 drugs like semaglutide appear to offer significant benefits, with far less risk and milder side effects, write Hernandez and coauthors.

    “Other than budget impact, it is hard to find a reason to justify the historical statutory exclusion of weight loss drugs from coverage other than the stigma of the condition itself,” they write.

    What’s happening today that could lead Medicare to start covering weight loss drugs?

    Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly both have hired lobbyists to try to persuade lawmakers to reverse this stance, according to Senate records.  Pro tip: You can use the Senate’s lobbying disclosure database to track this and other issues. Type in the name of the company of interest and then read through the forms. 

    Some members of Congress already have been trying for years to strike the Medicare Part D restriction on weight-loss drugs. Over the past decade, senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Bill Cassidy, MD, (R-LA) have repeatedly introduced bills that would do that. They introduced the current version, the Treat and Reduce Obesity Act of 2023, in July. It has the support of 10 other Republican senators and seven Democratic ones, as of Dec. 19. The companion House measure has the support of 41 Democrats and 23 Republicans in that chamber, which has 435 seats.

    The influential nonprofit Institute for Clinical and Economic Review conducts in-depth analyses of drugs and medical treatments in the United States. ICER last year recommended passage of a law allowing Medicare Part D to cover weight-loss medications. ICER also called for broader coverage of weight-loss medications in state Medicaid programs. Insurers, including Medicare, consider ICER’s analyses in deciding whether to cover treatments.

    While offering these calls for broader coverage as part of a broad assessment of obesity management, ICER also urged companies to reduce the costs of weight-loss medicines.

    Most people with obesity can’t achieve sustained weight loss through diet and exercise alone, said David Rind, ICER’s chief medical officer in an August 2022 statement. The development of newer obesity treatments represents the achievement of a long-standing goal of medical research, but prices of these new products must be reasonable to allow broad access to them, he noted.

    After an extensive process of reviewing studies, engaging in public debate and processing feedback, ICER concluded that semaglutide for weight loss should have an annual cost of $7,500 to $9,800, based on its potential benefits.

    What does academic research say about the benefits and the potential costs of new obesity drugs?

    Here are a couple of studies to consider when covering the ongoing story of weight-loss drug costs:

    Medicare Part D Coverage of Antiobesity Medications — Challenges and Uncertainty Ahead
    Khrysta Baig, Stacie B. Dusetzina, David D. Kim and Ashley A. Leech. New England Journal of Medicine, March 2023

    In this Perspective piece, researchers at Vanderbilt University create a series of estimates about how much Medicare may have to spend annually on weight-loss drugs if the program eventually covers these drugs.

    These include a high estimate — $268 billion — based on an extreme calculation, one reflecting the potential cost if virtually all people on Medicare who have obesity used semaglutide. In an announcement of the study on the Vanderbilt website, lead author Khrysta Baig described this as a “purely hypothetical scenario,” but one that “ underscores that at current prices, these medications cannot be the only way – or even the main way – we address obesity as a society.”

    In a more conservative estimate, Bhaig and coauthors consider a case where only about 10% of those eligible for obesity treatment opted for semaglutide, which would result in $27 billion in new costs.

     (To put these numbers in context, consider that the federal government now spends about $145 billion a year on the entire Part D program.)

    It’s likely that all people enrolled in Part D would have to pay higher monthly premiums if Medicare were to cover weight-loss injections, Baig and coauthors write.

    Baig and coauthors note that the recent ICER review of weight-loss drugs focused on patients younger than the Medicare population. The balance of benefits and risks associated with weight-loss drugs may be less favorable for older people than the younger ones, making it necessary to study further how these drugs work for people aged 65 and older, they write. For example, research has shown older adults with a high blood sugar level called prediabetes are less likely to develop diabetes than younger adults with this condition.

    SELECTing Treatments for Cardiovascular Disease — Obesity in the Spotlight
    Amit Khera and Tiffany M. Powell-Wiley. New England Journal of Medicine, Dec. 14, 2023
    Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Without Diabetes
    A Michael Lincoff, et. al. New England Journal of Medicine, Dec. 14, 2023.

    An editorial accompanies the publication of a semaglutide study that drew a lot of coverage in the media. The Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Obesity without Diabetes (SELECT) study was a randomized controlled trial, conducted by Novo Nordisk, which looked at rates of cardiovascular events in people who already had known heart risk and were overweight, but not diabetic. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a once-weekly dose of semaglutide (Wegovy) or a placebo.

    In the study, the authors report that of the 8,803 patients who took Wegovy in the trial, 569 (6.5%)  had a heart attack or another cardiovascular event, compared with 701 of the 8801 patients (8.0%) in the placebo group. The mean duration of exposure to semaglutide or placebo in the study was 34.2 months.

    The study also reports a mean 9.4% reduction in body weight among patients taking Wegovy, while those on placebo had a mean loss of 0.88%.

    The findings suggest Wegovy may be a welcome new treatment option for many people who have coronary disease and are overweight, but are not diabetic, write Khera and Powell-Wiley in their editorial. 

    But the duo, both of whom focus on disease prevention in their research, also call for more focus on the prevention and root causes of obesity and on the use of proven treatment approaches other than medication.

    “Socioeconomic, environmental, and psychosocial factors contribute to incident obesity, and therefore equity-focused obesity prevention and treatment efforts must target multiple levels,” they write. “For instance, public policy targeting built environment features that limit healthy behaviors can be coupled with clinical care interventions that provide for social needs and access to treatments like semaglutide.”

    Additional information:

    The nonprofit KFF, formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation, has done recent reports looking at the potential for expanded coverage of semaglutide:

    Medicaid Utilization and Spending on New Drugs Used for Weight Loss, Sept. 8, 2023

    What Could New Anti-Obesity Drugs Mean for Medicare? May 18, 2023

    And KFF held an Aug. 4 webinar, New Weight Loss Drugs Raise Issues of Coverage, Cost, Access and Equity, for which the recording is posted here.

    This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: