Hacker News Reader

Comment by feverzsj | Hacker News Reader

Why would FDA do that? Obesity is the biggest public health disaster in US. They should make it as cheap as ibuprofen.

Careful, if you start framing the problem like that you might end up with socialized healthcare!

It isn’t a choice. Compounding is only legal when there is a federal shortage of the drug. When the shortage ends so does compounding. If the fda declares a shortage when there isn’t one they get sued.

Because it’s under patent.

There was a temporary allowance for compounding it due to sustained manufacturer shortages but that is in the process of expiring.

Wasn’t GLP-1 discovered in 1984?

Not the newer ones that have lower risks of lifetime digestive issues.

As far as we know.

The first generation drug Exenatide's patent was filed in 1992, but got approved in 2005. The latest one is Tirzepatide, a dual agonist, approved in 2022. Expect soon for Retaglutide, a triple agnonist, in the market.

hopefully to protect my investment in lily

Do you want them to keep spending money on drug R&D to solve all the other problems that still exist?

No one says companies should lose money. The government can cover the price for everyone just like they did for covid vaccines. Considering obesity adds between $147 billion and $210 billion to annual U.S. health-care expenses[0], it would cost much less.

[0]: https://theweek.com/articles/870872/americas-deadly-obesity-...

My mathematical intuition says this isn't really much considering US annual GDP is 27 trillion (27,000 billions) USD. So less than 1% of GDP.

Your linked article says: Obesity adds between $147 billion and $210 billion to annual U.S. health-care expenses, increasing an average adult's medical costs by 42 percent — an estimated $200,000 over a lifetime.

Since annual GDP per person in the US is roughly 80k USD and average life expectancy is also roughly 80 so roughly 6.4m USD GDP per person lifetime. 200,000 USD over 6.4m would imply over 3% of GDP, which seems more reasonable.

GDP isn't actual income. It's just a number.

Sure, but gross labor share of GDP is 60% in the US (salaried employees earn 60% of GDP in total) so it doesn't change the consideration that much.

The US is spending roughly 15% of the GDP on health. If 1% of GDP is due to obesity then this is 'just' 1/15th of the overall health spending. If 3% of GDP is due to obesity then this is 20% (3/15th) of the overall health cost in the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com