> I highly recommend checking out the terms of trumprx.gov

The website is very good marketing for people who don't typically follow drug pricing. Here is more about why the only folks who will benefit are those without insurance—but those people will find better prices in several places, sometimes significantly better prices [1]. Further, it's likely that they're already finding those prices, since the website prices are no better than what you can get today outside fertility medication; and fertility medications are neither new, nor the most expensive part of that process.

This site has nothing to do with the effective subsidies that Americans provide to the world, and it will change nothing about that. The major thing that would help all Americans, negotiating for drug prices, has been neutered by the current administration. In fact, an executive order has specifically lengthened the amount of time that new drugs will be able to charge higher prices to Americans [2].

We should all be very careful in parsing news items that are not in our field of expertise.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/05/health/trumprx-online-dru...

2. https://www.kff.org/medicare/the-effect-of-delaying-the-sele...

> I highly recommend checking out the terms of trumprx.gov - not endorsing the entire government here, but it is actually working and quite cleverly written to ensure Americans are getting the lowest cost drugs in the world now.

Brief research indicates otherwise unless you're talking about a handful of Brand name Rx. For generics, CostPlus and other options are still better pricing.

https://www.healthcompiler.com/cost-plus-drugs-vs-trumprx-ho...

> unless you are at serious risk of diabetes

The US obesity rate is in the 40% range.

The most effective use of public funds would be to simply buy out the patent and give it out for free. It will save so much in future medical costs it's a no-brainer.

> hopefully that’s a net positive

It can't possibly be a net positive. The first pill costs $1B and subsequent ones costs 50 cents. Yes, the U.S. pays more, but the result can only be some combination of 1) other countries also paying more and 2) fewer new drugs.

> On the insurance front - expect your insurance to decline this forever unless you are at serious risk of diabetes. It would make you cost them $3-6k/yr more. Insurance premiums would rise for everyone if insurance was subsidizing this - no free lunch.

It's often up to the employer whether these meds are covered - many insurers just offer it as an option to check or not check.

That said, even at 3-6k/year, it wouldn't surprise me if these drugs were net savings to cover for a lot of patients due to their extremely positive effects as preventative care.

Novo will also sell you the auto-injector Wegovy directly starting at $199/month. And the pill starting at $149/month.

>On the insurance front - expect your insurance to decline this forever unless you are at serious risk of diabetes.

I'm not understanding this part. If these drugs have solved obesity and the whole host of associated diseases, including the number one killer; heart disease, shouldn't the insurance companies be clambering over each other to cover these drugs and heavily encouraging their use considering the cost reduction on the overall health system.

And if the incentives are misaligned with insurance companies why are governments not handing out GLP-1s to anyone who asks?

The major Indian generics manufacturers have all signed branding and IP agreements with Lilly and Novo as well, so the only people that are hurt are consumers I guess.

India wins (because Indian pharma gets IP and branding transfers). The Trump admin wins (the right strategic lobbying was done). The GOP wins (strategic tariffs on Iowa, North Dakota, and Montana lentil and soybean oil exports were about to kick off in India after they were hit by similar tariffs from China). The American consumer (who voted for Trump) loses.

Welcome to a trade war.