Hello, Monday. Today's newsletter is 1,086 words or a 4-minute read.

The biggest buzz around GLP-1 drugs these days has nothing to do with weight loss. And that might lead to some problems for patients and insurers.

The big picture: Blockbuster treatments like Ozempic have been found to lower the risk of everything from Alzheimer's and addiction, to sleep apnea, seizures and bacterial infections. More potential uses keep surfacing.

• It's still not clear whether they're a cure-all, or whether the benefits come from the fact that obesity and diabetes give rise to so many other health problems.

State of play: The injectable drugs' potential beyond weight loss was driven home early this year by a study of almost 2 million Veterans Health Administration patient records that found GLP-1s lowered the likelihood of dozens of health conditions.

• Researchers found the benefits were modest — about a 10% to 20% reduction in most cases — but noted that could be meaningful, especially for conditions like dementia that have few effective treatments.

Friction point: The FDA has only approved GLP-1s for obesity, Type 2 diabetes, heart risk and, under certain circumstances, sleep apnea. That means using them for any other condition is "off label" and at a physician's discretion.

• The designation can affect whether insurers pay for the treatments. That's no small matter when the monthly cost of brand-name options like Wegovy and Zepbound range from $1,000 to $1,350 without coverage.
• The hype around the drugs has sent many Americans to telemedicine companies that sell brand-name or knockoff GLP-1s. One recent study found that nearly 40% of GLP-1s approved by the FDA for diabetes are being prescribed off-label.

More here

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. plans to oust the 16-member expert panel that makes recommendations for preventive services that insurers must cover fully under the Affordable Care Act, according to reports.

Why it matters: About 100 million people get no-cost cancer screenings, counseling and other services under the ACA. But some conservatives have urged Kennedy to replace the current members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

• Kennedy postponed a meeting of the panel scheduled for earlier this month amid speculation in the public health community that he could fire its members.

The latest: Kennedy plans to dismiss all the members of the advisory panel because he views them as too "woke," the Wall Street Journal first reported, quoting people familiar with the matter.

• The Supreme Court last month upheld the structure of the task force in a case surrounding coverage of HIV prevention drugs, ruling that the long-standing panel of volunteer scientists are accountable to the HHS secretary, who has the power to remove and replace members at will.
• The case stemmed from a 2020 lawsuit by Christian-owned companies over a task force recommendation requiring them to cover no-cost HIV drugs in their employer-sponsored insurance.

Kennedy has already fired all members of the panel that advises the CDC on immunization recommendations, removing all 17 of its members and replacing them with handpicked successors.

• "No final decision has been made on how the USPSTF can better support HHS' mandate to Make America Healthy Again," Andrew Nixon, HHS director of communications, wrote in an email to Axios.
• The American Medical Association yesterday expressed "deep concern" over the latest reports and urged Kennedy in a letter to retain the previously appointed task force members.

The average total in-network cost of giving birth in the U.S. is about $15,200 for vaginal deliveries and $19,300 for C-sections, per data from FAIR Health, a national independent nonprofit.

By the numbers: For vaginal deliveries, Alaska has the highest average cost (about $29,200), followed by New York and New Jersey (both about $21,800).

• Alaska also has the highest average cost for C-sections ($39,500), followed by Maine ($28,800) and Vermont ($28,700).

How it works: The amounts in FAIR's Cost of Giving Birth Tracker include delivery, ultrasounds, lab work and more.

• They reflect total costs paid by patients and their insurance companies, as applicable.
• Insured patients' financial responsibilities are typically well below the total amount paid, with average out-of-pocket costs of just under $3,000 in 2018-2020, per a 2022 Peterson-KFF analysis.

What they're saying: Many factors drive the differences between states, FAIR Health's Rachel Kent tells Axios, including provider training levels, local salaries and costs of living, malpractice insurance costs and insurers' bargaining power.

Between the lines: Black and Hispanic people paid more out of pocket for maternal care than Asian and white patients with the same insurance, per a study published earlier this year in JAMA Health Forum.

Reality check: Birth costs are just one of many financial burdens for new parents, with pediatrician and child care bills often following soon after.

Reach execs and business leaders with Axios.

We'll help you tell your story in the right way:

• We'll distill your brand's message into its most effective form with Smart Brevity.
• No clutter, no filler — just clean, smart and effective.

Contact us to learn more.

Depending on whom you ask, a full-body MRI is either an early-detection breakthrough or an unnecessary procedure that harms more than helps.

Why it matters: Scans from companies like Prenuvo and Ezra have become a popular health splurge for adults focused on longevity.

• That's largely thanks to wellness influencers, celebrity endorsements and a distrust of the conventional medical system.

By the numbers: Prenuvo has completed 50,000 scans since December — and 150,000 total since 2018, CEO Andrew Lacy tells Axios.

What they found: Prenuvo scans spotted cancer in 2.2% of mostly asymptomatic patients, according to an ongoing study conducted by the MRI company and presented at an American Association for Cancer Research conference in April.

• Roughly half of the biopsies prompted by scan findings turned out to reveal cancer.

Between the lines: Just because a scan detected cancer, that doesn't mean the cancer was aggressive or that the detection extended someone's lifespan.

• In the study, two breast cancer cases were not detected by a whole-body MRI.

What we're hearing: Full-body scans are "the bane of my existence," says oncologist Marleen Meyers, director of NYU Langone's survivorship program at the Perlmutter Cancer Center.

• She says that most findings from full-body MRIs are false positives or benign, but "the knowledge, the stress and fact you start treatment then upends your life."

Share this

⚖️ A Texas man whose girlfriend used abortion pills to end her pregnancy filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against a California doctor who allegedly mailed the medication. (WaPo)

⚕️ The CDC's flagship public health journal is publishing fewer articles than in the past, and they're being subjected to extra top-down reviews. (MedPage Today)