×
Eli Lilly’s Obesity Pill Shows Promising Weight Loss in New Results

Eli Lilly’s Obesity Pill Shows Promising Weight Loss in New Results

An experimental pill made by Eli Lilly led to average weight loss of more than 12 percent of body weight in individuals with obesity, according to initial trial results announced by the drugmaker on Thursday. The pill is meant to be taken daily and would be an alternative to the company’s popular anti-obesity drug Zepbound, a once-weekly injectable drug.

Called orforglipron, it’s part of a growing class of drugs known as GLP-1s, which include Novo Nordisk’s Ozempic and Wegovy. The drugs mimic a naturally occurring hormone in the body that helps regulate blood sugar and promotes a feeling of fullness. Injected GLP-1 drugs have shown weight loss of around 15 to 20 percent.

Eli Lilly’s 18-month trial included more than 3,000 adults with an average starting weight of 228 pounds and a body mass index of 37, which is considered obese. Participants were randomized to receive either 6, 12, or 36 milligrams of orforglipron or a placebo pill. The lowest dose of orforglipron resulted in less than 8 percent loss of body weight, or about 18 pounds, and the middle dose led to a 9 percent reduction, or 21 pounds.

The highest dose led to the most weight loss—12 percent on average, or about 27 pounds, compared to 2 pounds with the placebo. In the highest-dose group, about 60 percent of participants lost at least 10 percent of their body weight, while 40 percent lost 15 percent or more.

Participants who received orforglipron started the study at a dose of 1 milligram daily and then increased the dose every four weeks to their final maintenance dose. Everyone in the trial, including those in the placebo group, was also prescribed a healthy diet and physical activity. There were no food or water restrictions for taking the pill.

The pill was safe, but like injected GLP-1 drugs, orforglipron caused gastrointestinal side effects for many participants. The most common was nausea, which was suffered by a third of participants in the highest-dose group; constipation was experienced by about a quarter of patients in that group, as were diarrhea and vomiting. Those side effects led to more than 20 percent of participants in each dosage group dropping out during the course of the study.

Eli Lilly says more detailed results will be presented in September at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes annual meeting and published in a peer-reviewed journal. Novo Nordisk has a GLP-1 pill for diabetes, Rybelsus, but it’s not as effective for weight loss as injectable versions and was never approved for weight management.

Orforglipron also looks promising as a diabetes treatment. In a recent study published in The New England Journal of Medicine, the pill lowered blood sugar levels and weight in people with type 2 diabetes. Eli Lilly says it plans to submit orforglipron for regulatory review by the end of the year.

Novo Nordisk has a GLP-1 pill for diabetes, Rybelsus, but it’s not as effective for weight loss as injectable versions and was never approved for weight management. A challenge with developing a more effective pill has been how to improve its bioavailability—the amount of drug that enters circulation and has an active effect. Other GLP-1 drugs are made up of larger molecules that are not easily absorbed in the gastrointestinal tract. Instead, most of the drug gets digested. Eli Lilly might have solved that problem with orforglipron, a small-molecule formulation.

Source link
#Eli #Lillys #Obesity #Pill #Shows #Promising #Weight #Loss #Results

We’re retiring our oldest plans, some of which were built nearly 15 years ago – in the 3G and 4G eras, and well before our 5G network was fully deployed. Customers will transition to modern plans that provide access to America’s best wireless technology, enhanced features and a 5-year price guarantee for peace of mind. Some customers will see no change to their monthly bill, while some will see a modest adjustment. Every customer moved to a new plan will keep their current benefits while gaining improvements in network and service experiences.

#TMobile #booting #customers #oldest #plans5G,Mobile,Sprint,T-Mobile,Tech">T-Mobile is booting customers from its oldest plansWe’re retiring our oldest plans, some of which were built nearly 15 years ago – in the 3G and 4G eras, and well before our 5G network was fully deployed. Customers will transition to modern plans that provide access to America’s best wireless technology, enhanced features and a 5-year price guarantee for peace of mind. Some customers will see no change to their monthly bill, while some will see a modest adjustment. Every customer moved to a new plan will keep their current benefits while gaining improvements in network and service experiences.#TMobile #booting #customers #oldest #plans5G,Mobile,Sprint,T-Mobile,Tech
AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs">The AI jobs debate just got messier | TechCrunch
AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 







The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average  per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%. 

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.


So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 







That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs

announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs">The AI jobs debate just got messier | TechCrunch

AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs

Post Comment