sarah_TO said:

Denied on prior authorisation twice, approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer, and the only thing that changed was who was doing the…

Financial impact of cost and coverage weight loss beyond medication cost:

• Groceries: SAVED $227/month (eating less)
• Restaurants: SAVED $177/month (fewer meals out)
• Alcohol: SAVED $127/month (stopped drinking)
• Life insurance: Premium REDUCED by $37/month (lower BMI)
• Copays: SAVED $57/month (fewer BP/cholesterol meds)

Net impact after medication cost: approximately BREAKING EVEN. The medication pays for itself through reduced food spending and healthcare costs. This surprised me.

BenResearch_OR said:

Financial impact of cost and coverage weight loss beyond medication cost: Groceries: SAVED $227/month (eating less) Restaurants: SAVED $177/month…

BenResearch_OR said:

...compounded vs brand cost and coverage...

This debate comes up weekly and I think both sides have valid points:

Pro-brand: FDA-approved, manufacturing standards guaranteed, clinical trial data directly applicable

Pro-compounded: 10x cost savings, same active molecule, independent testing available, accessibility

My position: if you can afford brand or have insurance coverage, that's the gold standard. If not, properly tested compounded from a 503B pharmacy is a reasonable alternative. Neither side should shame the other.

sarah_TO said:

Denied on prior authorisation twice, approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer, and the only thing that changed was who was doing the…

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

My insurance denied my PA related to cost and coverage. Has anyone successfully appealed? I'm considering going compounded instead.