Lilly may seek biologics designation for Retatrutide

I came across something too: if reta ends up designated a biologic, that would in practice shut down the pathway that lets compounders and “research use only” sellers offer it
 
oldrunnerguy said:

My stockpiling remark was meant as a joke, though I'm genuinely curious how Lilly plans to go after the gray market for Reta. That market must already be enormous, no?
It gives the impression that our numbers are huge, since any sizable group clustered together can seem enormous from one individual's viewpoint. Still, when you set that against all the overweight folks who wish they weren't and are clamoring for these drugs, I suspect our actual count is fairly small—and we barely cut into their earnings.
 
eidos said:

BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
That matches what I went through. My primary care doctor suggested Victoza, so I began using it (Ozempic couldn't be found in stock back then). Then in 2024 I saw a diabetologist, and he said he didn't believe in GLP-1 agonists.

It's still far too common for doctors to make patients feel guilty.
Hearing that is genuinely quite disturbing — a supposedly qualified specialist making such a claim while ignoring the wealth of data showing how effective it is as a diabetes therapy, and not even taking into account the weight loss benefits. They cut the risk of developing most long-term diabetes complications by a substantial margin. Far, far more than insulin does. For most people the barrier is price or availability, but clearly some specialists either don't review the studies or don't adhere to treatment guidelines. If you can, it sounds like a good reason to look for another specialist. Unfortunately, prejudice within medicine is all too real.

When it comes to the newer biological drugs, the majority are antibody-based rather than peptides, which will make them significantly harder for Chinese peptide manufacturers to copy illegally.
 
lessthanhalf said:

eidos said:

BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
That matches what I went through. My primary care doctor suggested Victoza, so I began using it (Ozempic couldn't be found in stock back then). Then in 2024 I saw a diabetologist, and he said he didn't believe in GLP-1 agonists.

It's still far too common for doctors to make patients feel guilty.
Hearing that is genuinely quite disturbing — a supposedly qualified specialist making such a claim while ignoring the wealth of data showing how effective it is as a diabetes therapy, and not even taking into account the weight loss benefits. They cut the risk of developing most long-term diabetes complications by a substantial margin. Far, far more than insulin does. For most people the barrier is price or availability, but clearly some specialists either don't review the studies or don't adhere to treatment guidelines. If you can, it sounds like a good reason to look for another specialist. Unfortunately, prejudice within medicine is all too real.

When it comes to the newer biological drugs, the majority are antibody-based rather than peptides, which will make them significantly harder for Chinese peptide manufacturers to copy illegally.
I wouldn't call myself against medicine—quite the reverse, actually.

Still, during the past 10 years or so, I've seen that physicians holding MD degrees tend to hugely overrate how much they know about newer biochemistry and pharmacology. Sure, becoming a medical doctor demands an enormous amount of commitment, learning and training, yet none of that alters the reality that they aren't the ones conducting actual research. Many of them lag behind in keeping their knowledge current, and that's what separates strong doctors from average ones.
 
In most nations, even physicians who are not specialists have to show they are continuing their medical education to keep their registration active, and those in specialty practice face even heavier demands, along with informal pressure from colleagues to stay current with research if they care about their standing — which matters when they want other doctors to send patients their way.

That does not require familiarity with every study still in the pipeline, so it is not entirely reasonable to fault them for limited knowledge of reta prior to approval. Yet for an endocrinologist to be unaware of tirzepatide or semaglutide, or to dismiss them, is difficult to picture, since GLP-related drugs have filled roughly every other article in diabetes and endocrinology journals for years now. I would also consider them the most significant shift the field has ever seen: a condition that was common, disabling and essentially untreatable — obesity — suddenly acquired a therapy that genuinely works, which is uncommon in medicine. Still, some doctors do only the bare minimum to satisfy registration requirements, or perhaps such requirements do not exist everywhere.
 
hotsauceboss said:

oldrunnerguy said:

Based on what I've gathered, should Retatrutide receive this classification, Lilly might gain free rein over how they set prices. I'm hoping that isn't the case. Time to start building a stash, perhaps! https://investor.lilly.com/news-rel...agonist-retatrutide-successful-two-additional.
The only way stockpiling matters is if you believe today's suppliers will honor US patent rules and halt manufacturing. For those in this community who have no intention of ever purchasing from Lilly, that makes no difference.
Once it's classified as a registered "medicine" rather than "just a research chemical," wouldn't customs and inspections come down harder on sellers? That's the reason I'd consider stockpiling…
 
markspeptides said:

hotsauceboss said:

oldrunnerguy said:

Based on what I've gathered, should Retatrutide receive this classification, Lilly might gain free rein over how they set prices. I'm hoping that isn't the case. Time to start building a stash, perhaps! https://investor.lilly.com/news-rel...agonist-retatrutide-successful-two-additional.
The only way stockpiling matters is if you believe today's suppliers will honor US patent rules and halt manufacturing. For those in this community who have no intention of ever purchasing from Lilly, that makes no difference.
Once it's classified as a registered "medicine" rather than "just a research chemical," wouldn't customs and inspections come down harder on sellers? That's the reason I'd consider stockpiling…
Good thing I built up a supply... that should cover me for 1.5 years
 
BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
I live in the UK, and I dropped 40kg during the same period that my friend in Belgium put on roughly that much. She kept pressing me for advice on how to shed the weight, and she was fully aware I was using GLP1s, since I'd been in a medical study at the start and had shared that with her.

Only after she spent six months asking me again and again, 'yeah but what else do you do?', has she finally come around to seeing that GLP1s are medication, and that some of us need them. Even now, she's irritated about the cost, despite my attempts to point out that a low dose of prescribed tirz is far cheaper than buying takeout every single day.
 
ladyj779 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.
And it's worth adding that what people pay abroad is never close to the figures seen in the US 👎👎👎
In the UK these were once within reach, thanks to an arrangement between our NHS and Lilly. Then Trump voiced complaints, wanting the US price brought down, and Lilly answered by raising UK prices 3-fold inside a single month.

That's a rough break, yet it brought me to this place, and these days I get far more say over my own dose and which medication I take, at least.
 
The worldwide obesity drug sector is enormous. Looking at how sema and tirz are priced across western nations, the Middle East and Asia, it's obvious that every pen will cost several thousand $$. .. TIRZ prices could be slashed while RT carries steep premiums. Official generics from Asia would need at minimum 5-10 years before hitting the market. The grey scene will persist for a long time ahead ...
 
lastresort said:

lessthanhalf said:

eidos said:

BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
That matches what I went through. My primary care doctor suggested Victoza, so I began using it (Ozempic couldn't be found in stock back then). Then in 2024 I saw a diabetologist, and he said he didn't believe in GLP-1 agonists.

It's still far too common for doctors to make patients feel guilty.
Hearing that is genuinely quite disturbing — a supposedly qualified specialist making such a claim while ignoring the wealth of data showing how effective it is as a diabetes therapy, and not even taking into account the weight loss benefits. They cut the risk of developing most long-term diabetes complications by a substantial margin. Far, far more than insulin does. For most people the barrier is price or availability, but clearly some specialists either don't review the studies or don't adhere to treatment guidelines. If you can, it sounds like a good reason to look for another specialist. Unfortunately, prejudice within medicine is all too real.

When it comes to the newer biological drugs, the majority are antibody-based rather than peptides, which will make them significantly harder for Chinese peptide manufacturers to copy illegally.
I wouldn't call myself against medicine—quite the reverse, actually.

Still, during the past 10 years or so, I've seen that physicians holding MD degrees tend to hugely overrate how much they know about newer biochemistry and pharmacology. Sure, becoming a medical doctor demands an enormous amount of commitment, learning and training, yet none of that alters the reality that they aren't the ones conducting actual research. Many of them lag behind in keeping their knowledge current, and that's what separates strong doctors from average ones.
Speaking as a physician, I see part of your point. Medicine covers so much ground that staying current with every development is impossible for any single person. For most of us, there simply isn't enough time to get through much reading, and when topics aren't discussed among peers at conferences or meetings, blind spots can appear. This often comes down to specialists and those who focus their work on particular fields.
 
deleted.user.27 said:

No need to worry everyone, cocaine remains available and works well to curb hunger. It's a fantastic fat burner, plus it costs less abroad too.🤣🤣
plus it relieves constipation … quite a medication
 
ColdSmoke said:

deleted.user.27 said:

No need to worry everyone, cocaine remains available and works well to curb hunger. It's a fantastic fat burner, plus it costs less abroad too.🤣🤣
plus it relieves constipation … quite a medication
It also sharpens concentration, wipes out self-esteem issues and depression!!!!…for 20 minutes 🤣
 
Calling this a biologic would be incorrect, since it isn't one. Still, with enough cash involved, that label could end up being applied anyway.

Today I went ahead and placed an order for additional supply, though only 1 kit. My current stash is small, yet it covers me for quite a while, and by the time I use it up, something newer and better might have come along.
 
adbh said:

lastresort said:

lessthanhalf said:

eidos said:

BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
That matches what I went through. My primary care doctor suggested Victoza, so I began using it (Ozempic couldn't be found in stock back then). Then in 2024 I saw a diabetologist, and he said he didn't believe in GLP-1 agonists.

It's still far too common for doctors to make patients feel guilty.
Hearing that is genuinely quite disturbing — a supposedly qualified specialist making such a claim while ignoring the wealth of data showing how effective it is as a diabetes therapy, and not even taking into account the weight loss benefits. They cut the risk of developing most long-term diabetes complications by a substantial margin. Far, far more than insulin does. For most people the barrier is price or availability, but clearly some specialists either don't review the studies or don't adhere to treatment guidelines. If you can, it sounds like a good reason to look for another specialist. Unfortunately, prejudice within medicine is all too real.

When it comes to the newer biological drugs, the majority are antibody-based rather than peptides, which will make them significantly harder for Chinese peptide manufacturers to copy illegally.
I wouldn't call myself against medicine—quite the reverse, actually.

Still, during the past 10 years or so, I've seen that physicians holding MD degrees tend to hugely overrate how much they know about newer biochemistry and pharmacology. Sure, becoming a medical doctor demands an enormous amount of commitment, learning and training, yet none of that alters the reality that they aren't the ones conducting actual research. Many of them lag behind in keeping their knowledge current, and that's what separates strong doctors from average ones.
Speaking as a physician, I see part of your point. Medicine covers so much ground that staying current with every development is impossible for any single person. For most of us, there simply isn't enough time to get through much reading, and when topics aren't discussed among peers at conferences or meetings, blind spots can appear. This often comes down to specialists and those who focus their work on particular fields.
Sure, that makes sense.
 
lessthanhalf said:

eidos said:

BBA1969 said:

Zuul said:

They have the freedom to set any price they want. But they're in for a rude awakening once they realize US insurers won't pay for it, and customers in Europe and the UK—who typically cover private prescriptions themselves (unless they go gray)—don't have endless money to spend.

Across much of the EU, using GLP-1 drugs for weight loss remains largely stigmatized. On top of that, the cost is prohibitive because insurers refuse to pay unless a person already has diabetes.

Many physicians from older generations won't prescribe these medications to patients who are merely overweight, absent any comorbid condition. If no comorbidity exists, the topic never even comes up.

My sister-in-law, age 47, has a BMI nearing 40. Her doctor prescribed sartans and statins and never brought up GLP-1s. He did warn her that she must shed weight immediately or she will head directly into type 2 diabetes.

The twisted irony is that should she develop diabetes, suffer a heart attack, or get cancer, her health insurance (Belgium) would then cover everything.

Lilly had better run some awareness campaigns in the EU!
That matches what I went through. My primary care doctor suggested Victoza, so I began using it (Ozempic couldn't be found in stock back then). Then in 2024 I saw a diabetologist, and he said he didn't believe in GLP-1 agonists.

It's still far too common for doctors to make patients feel guilty.
Hearing that is genuinely quite disturbing — a supposedly qualified specialist making such a claim while ignoring the wealth of data showing how effective it is as a diabetes therapy, and not even taking into account the weight loss benefits. They cut the risk of developing most long-term diabetes complications by a substantial margin. Far, far more than insulin does. For most people the barrier is price or availability, but clearly some specialists either don't review the studies or don't adhere to treatment guidelines. If you can, it sounds like a good reason to look for another specialist. Unfortunately, prejudice within medicine is all too real.

When it comes to the newer biological drugs, the majority are antibody-based rather than peptides, which will make them significantly harder for Chinese peptide manufacturers to copy illegally.

When it came to my father, this specialist did well — he put him on SGLT2 inhibitors. He isn't completely useless 🙂 The problem is simply that co-creating with him isn't possible for me.

Nutrition and sports medicine are also specialties of my primary care doctor. His knowledge has stayed current. From the outset he made it plain: I'll be better off turning myself into my own diabetes specialist, since keeping pace with every new development isn't something he has time for.

All I have to manage is 2 conditions and 3 or 4 medications (the count has dropped since my cardiologist “barbecued” my heart to bring back the electrical signal).

Out of the roughly 2,000 illnesses and injuries that show up in temperate regions, a general practitioner encounters somewhere around 200-300 of the common ones annually. That's before counting the tropical diseases now appearing, or the over 100,000 entries in the newest ICD index.

In just the first quarter, diabetes alone generated more than 400 articles on the PubMed/NCBI website. Half a day was what it took me.

Obviously, doctors have to discover different routes to remain current. And given all the administrative duties they must handle, that has grown hard.
 
oldrunnerguy said:

My stockpiling remark was meant as a joke, though I'm genuinely curious how Lilly plans to go after the gray market for Reta. That market must already be enormous, no?
Lilly is going to take whatever steps it can to curb the gray market. Still, in most respects, its approach will stay the same as it is today: it tolerates the situation simply because there is no alternative.
 
The majority of EL buyers, whether current or prospective, won't take a chance on the grey market — nor even on sellers offering individual vials. For plenty of people, the compounded option is frightening too.

The hard truth is that longer life will go to those with the money to pay, while those without it — and who can't make themselves pursue other routes — will face an earlier death.

Honestly, it's heartbreaking.
 
Back
Top