Receive your essential health and medicine updates every weekday with STAT’s complimentary newsletter, Morning Rounds. Sign up here.
Good morning. Sometimes, staying hydrated can be a challenge. Let’s make an effort to drink more water today.
A new competitor to CDC’s MMWR is making its debut
The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report is often hailed as “the CDC’s voice,” serving as a cornerstone of public health where new outbreaks and emerging diseases are initially reported. However, as the Trump administration continues to reshape the agency’s operations, two organizations are preparing to launch an alternative to this publication. Former MMWR editor-in-chief Charlotte Kent noted that administration officials were pressuring the journal to alter its reporting methods.
Now, the New England Journal of Medicine and the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy will start issuing “public health alerts” on an as-needed basis as part of a new section in the NEJM Evidence journal. Discover more on STAT from Anil Oza about this emerging journal and its functionalities.
A recent review evaluates antidepressant side effects
The side effects experienced from taking antidepressants can differ significantly based on the specific medication, particularly regarding cardiometabolic factors, as highlighted in a systematic review published yesterday in The Lancet. This variability is likely familiar to anyone who has navigated the challenge of finding the right antidepressant, and the review corroborates this through an analysis of 151 randomized controlled trials and 17 FDA reports regarding over 30 medications for various mental health disorders.
For instance, medications like maprotiline and amitriptyline were linked to weight gain in nearly half of users, while agomelatine was associated with weight loss in over half. There was an approximate 4-kilogram (nearly 9 lb.) difference in average weight changes between users of agomelatine and maprotiline. Furthermore, drugs such as nortriptyline, clomipramine, and imipramine typically increased heart rate compared to placebo, whereas fluvoxamine and moclobemide lowered heart rate.
It’s important to note that these findings stem from short-term studies, generally averaging eight weeks. There is a significant lack of long-term research concerning the effects of antidepressants. (If you have any professional or personal experiences to share on this topic, I would be eager to hear your story.)
Innovative DTC business model combines lower insurance and discounted prices
Two startups are proposing a novel model for employers to assist their employees in obtaining medications at lower costs, bypassing insurance coverage. By subsidizing a portion of the direct-to-consumer cash price for medications like Wegovy and Zepbound, employers can spend less than they would by covering these drugs through insurance, and their employees can access treatments for less than they would otherwise pay out of pocket.
This new approach is a response to the growing trend of direct-to-consumer drug sales, as reported by STAT’s Elaine Chen. Lilly and Novo, the leading manufacturers of obesity medications, were pioneers in selling their products at lower cash prices than the list prices. Consequently, amid pressure from President Trump to lower drug costs broadly, other pharmaceutical companies have started offering cash-payment options for various primary care medications. Learn more about this new DTC model and its future implications for the pharmaceutical market.
$27,000
This figure represents the cost of a family plan under employer-provided health insurance this year, reflecting a premium increase that surpassed double the rate of inflation, as per an annual KFF survey. KFF CEO Drew Altman remarked, “There is a quiet alarm bell going off. With GLP-1s, rising hospital prices, tariffs, and other factors, we foresee a sharper increase in employer premiums next year.” Read more on this topic from STAT’s Tara Bannow.
Is the U.S. health care system a failed experiment?
As illustrated above—and likely felt in your own financials—health care expenditures are soaring. In a new First Opinion essay, four physicians contend that while it’s common to attribute blame to factors like an aging populace, rising chronic illness rates, and novel drugs, these are not the true causes. Instead, the authors attribute the issue to relentless profit motives and a convoluted bureaucracy that is skewed toward generating those profits.
“Our exorbitant spending does not result in improved health outcomes, or better (or even more) care,” they assert. “Despite claims from ideologues suggesting that market-driven strategies would harness the cost-saving power of competition, the opposite has transpired; competition in health care has nearly vanished.” Read more on why the authors suggest it’s time to reevaluate this experiment and the changes they advocate for.
What we’re reading
-
Health officials assert that ending polio remains achievable, despite a 30% funding cut, Reuters
-
A month in, and we still lack information regarding Kennedy’s long COVID consortium, The Sick Times
- The government shutdown leads many CDC experts to miss a crucial infectious disease meeting, AP
- Big food industry gears up with new strategy against RFK Jr.’s initiatives in various states, Bloomberg
- First Opinion: Corporate funding cannot compensate for the threats posed to the NIH budget, STAT
