Agree that there is some real risk and likely increased reg. Counterpoint though: Why should a drug with rare and minimal side effects like finasteride be kept in the traditional healthcare ecosystem that largely profits pharmacy benefit managers?
I've been a skeptic of this bidness in the past, but my thesis now is that HIMS, while likely subject to increased reg and scrutiny, is disrupting PBMs. Other large caps like Novo and Lily are also offering D2C because they can offer the drugs for less than if they go through a PBM. Specialy GLP-1s
My counter/concern is incentives always drive actions. HIMS isn’t a healthcare business. It’s a prescription factory. I get the idea of disruption. The business model seems it incentivizes bad decisions over good patient outcomes. But! What I haven’t seen is the ratio of affected patients/scripts.
Valid concerns I've heard from some MDs and why increased regulation is likely imo. I have a small position to track and see how it plays out. The claim is that HIMS is a vertically-integrated healthcare provider. Maybe some people like the factory because it's just easy? We will see.
There is a reason every aspect of medical care shouldn’t just be quick and easy. There is a decent chance the men described in the article have had the their lives upended by convenience and a lack of diligence because these businesses have incentives that aren’t aligned with patient care first.
Comments