Nearly three-quarters of Americans are overweight or obese, and therefore at higher risk for chronic and debilitating conditions such as diabetes and heart disease. GLP-1 drugs, such as Ozempic and Wegoby, which help people lose weight by reducing their appetite and altering their digestion, have been hailed as a “miracle” with the potential to transform health and reduce costs at the national level. They may also support heart and kidney health.
Demand for GLP-1s is huge and growing, but access is uneven. These drugs can be expensive, topping $1,000 per month without insurance. On the other hand, less expensive options are readily available through loosely regulated direct-to-consumer telehealth companies, raising quality and safety concerns. Although around 12 percent of Americans say they have taken a GLP-1 at one time or another, the long-term effects of using these drugs – as well as the health impacts of discontinuing use – are not well known.
What should patients, physicians, insurers, policy makers, and researchers know about GLP-1 cost, access, and safety? This timely conversation and expert Q&A will be valuable to anyone with a personal or professional interest in these powerful new drugs.
Agenda
Additional speakers to be announced. Agenda is subject to change.
3:00 pm | Welcome
3:05 | Discussion
- Govind Persad, Associate Professor of Law, University of Colorado Law School
- Jeffrey A. Singer, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute
- Tracy Zvenyach, Director, Policy Strategy & Alliances, Obesity Action Coalition
3:50 | Audience Q&A
4:25 | Closing Remarks
4:30 | Adjourn
Health in the Headlines
This event is part of the National Academy of Medicine’s Health in the Headlines series, which investigates high-profile health and health policy topics making the news. Co-chaired by Alex Azar, former HHS Secretary, and Megan Ranney, Dean of the Yale School of Public Health, the series creates space for nuanced discussion and respectful debate among a diverse set of experts. Series guests are encouraged to distinguish clearly between empirical evidence and personal, cultural, or policy values that may shape their interpretation of the science.
