u/kian_ferreira

The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.

Not to be pedantic but formulary and step therapy are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.

appeal letter templates are in the wiki

Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.

copay is separate from coverage

telehealth costs compounding plus compounding markup, total varies

Strongly agree. Step therapy is predictable if you have the criteria.

Slight fix: the number was 97.6, not 97.4. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.

text removes the body-shaming pile-on

no images, none, not even redacted ones

Disagree on that part. 98.9% and 99.0% on the same vial is normal.

no commenting on anybody's body, comment on the process

This is correct. Appeal letters work.

Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.

Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone has to re-explain it.

say which country and which plan type

Adding to this: appeal is doing more work than the comment implies.

glucagon co-agonism has a different safety story

This is correct. The shortage list does expire and the rules change.

This is correct. Appeal letters work.

Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.

Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.