The Battle for Weight Loss Drugs: A Controversial Bill and Its Impact on Hims
In a move that has sent shockwaves through the industry, US lawmakers have introduced a bill that could significantly impact the business of Hims & Hers. But here's where it gets controversial: this bill aims to restrict the sale of compounded versions of popular weight-loss drugs, and Hims is feeling the heat.
The bill, known as the "Safeguarding Americans from Fraudulent and Experimental (SAFE) Drugs Act of 2025," is sponsored by Rep. Rudy Yakym III and Rep. Andre Carson, both from Indiana, where Eli Lilly, a major player in the weight loss drug market, is headquartered. This bill proposes a stricter approach to when it's legal to dispense compounded drugs, a practice that has gained traction in recent years.
Analysts at Citi have warned that this bill presents a significant challenge for Hims. They argue that it would "significantly curtail [Hims'] ability to compound GLP-1s," which is the product category driving the company's revenue growth. Under current federal law, compounding pharmacies can only sell exact copies of branded medications when there's a shortage. However, Lilly and Novo's GLP-1s were removed from the FDA's shortage list earlier this year, limiting the scope for compounding pharmacies to sell bespoke versions.
Telehealth companies like Hims have been marketing compounded GLP-1s as "personalized" alternatives. But the bill aims to raise the bar for what constitutes a legitimate personalized drug, requiring a doctor's determination that a compounded version offers a "significant difference" compared to commercially available versions.
And this is the part most people miss: the drugmakers, Lilly and Novo Nordisk, have been pushing back against the telehealth companies' claims of "personalization." They argue that these drugs are mass-produced and not tailored to specific patients as the law intends. Legal battles have ensued, with the drugmakers taking some of these companies to court, often unsuccessfully. They've also urged the FDA to step up enforcement, but the regulatory landscape is complex, with state regulators sharing responsibility.
The SAFE Act could give the FDA more power to crack down on compounders, who have been chipping away at drugmakers' market share. Hims, however, has not commented on the matter yet.
So, is this bill a necessary step to protect patients from potentially unsafe compounded drugs, or is it a move to protect the interests of established drugmakers? What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments!
