4 ms·

Subtly different: you read "most...return to normal...within 2 years", it says "When someone stops the medication, they'll [return to baseline]" Then from ther

Subtly different: you read "most...return to normal...within 2 years", it says "When someone stops the medication, they'll [return to baseline]" Then from there, I click through the 65% #, assuming they have a good study on 65% of people stop after a year. Nah, they don't. It's super complex but tl;dr: specific cohort, and somehow the # getting on it in year 2 is higher than the # of people who quit in year 1. I have a weak to medium prior, after 10m evaluating, that the entire thing might be built on more sand than it admits. Lot of little slants that create an absolute tone - ex. multiple payouts over the "lifetime" of a life insurance policy. (sure, it's technically possible) Also there's no citation for the idea this mortality slippage happened because of GLP-1, and it's been out for...what...a year? Maybe two? That's an awful lot of people who were about to die, saved in the nick of time by...losing weight? Again, possible, I'm sure it even happened in some cases. Enough to skew mortality slippage from 5.3% to 15.3%? I thought they were 98% accurate? Wait...is the slippage graph net life increase slippage? Or any slippage? Because it's very strange this explosion happened in exactly the year of a global pandemic that had sky-high mortality rates for older people.

samus 1y ago
Since it's so new, of course there aren't any long-term data on GLP-1 takers. However, relying on prior knowledge about people who are good on the metrics, it can be presumed that they will do fine. And won't create financial risk for the insurer due to passing on earlier than expected. But only if they keep taking their meds and/or fix any underlying behavioral and health issues that made them obese in the first case! Regarding the graph about slippage: yes, that looks like the Covid peak. However, even assuming this recent trend is an anomaly, the industry is in a changing landscape and needs to adapt. New metrics and criteria, and the fastest mover will capture the market. Business as usual. I don't feel sad except for the people who managed to bring their health issues under control and now can't get life insurance.
- alvah 1y ago
  GLP-1 isn’t new - the first trials were 20 years ago & there’s a lot of long term data from its use in diabetes management, prior to the weight loss application.
  - samus 1y ago
    Ok, sure - but are diabetes patients representative of the whole target market for GLP-1? And there will still be an uncomfortable variable that controls the outcome - patient compliance. That's what makes life insurers woozy.
    - oger 1y ago
      I didn't have look on the studies but I would not be surprised if a decent amount of participants were completely healthy individuals. And maybe (more from random sampling) some unsuspicious mildly overweight without other problems. Especially in the earlier cohorts of testing.
      - refulgentis 1y ago
        Right, you should read it though, we're in the weeds over here, it's not just sort of free-assocating chat, we're picking apart specific things about the article. One of them, as I mentioned 4 up, is that the study with the 65% # is confounded because the groupings involve type 1 diabetes, and also, the number rebounds higher than the # who stopped
stavros 1y ago
I've been on GLP-1 for a month and my triglycerides halved, and my cholesterol dropped to the levels it was in my twenties. If that's not a predictor of lower mortality, there's something wrong with our fundamental medical knowledge.
- refulgentis 1y ago
  I agree! (is this responding to part of my comment? :) )
  - stavros 1y ago
    Oh hmm, I may have replied to the wrong comment!
- eru 1y ago
  Has your weight dropped?
  - stavros 1y ago
    Yes, I lost around 4kg. Though the triglycerides and cholesterol are mostly because I stopped eating sweets and fatty foods, not because of the weight loss itself.
FergusArgyll 1y ago
The slippage part of the article is definitely bogus. The origin of the graph [0] attributes it to Accelerated Underwriting programs. [0] https://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/life-and-health/l-h-risk-trends/accelerated-underwriting-in-focus.html https://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/life-and-health/l-h-risk...

samus 1y ago

Since it's so new, of course there aren't any long-term data on GLP-1 takers. However, relying on prior knowledge about people who are good on the metrics, it can be presumed that they will do fine. And won't create financial risk for the insurer due to passing on earlier than expected. But only if they keep taking their meds and/or fix any underlying behavioral and health issues that made them obese in the first case! Regarding the graph about slippage: yes, that looks like the Covid peak. However, even assuming this recent trend is an anomaly, the industry is in a changing landscape and needs to adapt. New metrics and criteria, and the fastest mover will capture the market. Business as usual. I don't feel sad except for the people who managed to bring their health issues under control and now can't get life insurance.

alvah 1y ago
GLP-1 isn’t new - the first trials were 20 years ago & there’s a lot of long term data from its use in diabetes management, prior to the weight loss application.
- samus 1y ago
  Ok, sure - but are diabetes patients representative of the whole target market for GLP-1? And there will still be an uncomfortable variable that controls the outcome - patient compliance. That's what makes life insurers woozy.
  - oger 1y ago
    I didn't have look on the studies but I would not be surprised if a decent amount of participants were completely healthy individuals. And maybe (more from random sampling) some unsuspicious mildly overweight without other problems. Especially in the earlier cohorts of testing.
    - refulgentis 1y ago
      Right, you should read it though, we're in the weeds over here, it's not just sort of free-assocating chat, we're picking apart specific things about the article. One of them, as I mentioned 4 up, is that the study with the 65% # is confounded because the groupings involve type 1 diabetes, and also, the number rebounds higher than the # who stopped

stavros 1y ago

I've been on GLP-1 for a month and my triglycerides halved, and my cholesterol dropped to the levels it was in my twenties. If that's not a predictor of lower mortality, there's something wrong with our fundamental medical knowledge.

refulgentis 1y ago
I agree! (is this responding to part of my comment? :) )
- stavros 1y ago
  Oh hmm, I may have replied to the wrong comment!
eru 1y ago
Has your weight dropped?
- stavros 1y ago
  Yes, I lost around 4kg. Though the triglycerides and cholesterol are mostly because I stopped eating sweets and fatty foods, not because of the weight loss itself.

FergusArgyll 1y ago

The slippage part of the article is definitely bogus. The origin of the graph [0] attributes it to Accelerated Underwriting programs. [0] https://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/life-and-health/l-h-risk-trends/accelerated-underwriting-in-focus.html https://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/life-and-health/l-h-risk...