×
FDA Approves Pill Version of Wegovy

FDA Approves Pill Version of Wegovy

The US Food and Drug Administration today approved a pill version of the blockbuster anti-obesity drug Wegovy. Made by Novo Nordisk, the pill is taken once a day. The company’s original version of Wegovy is a weekly injection. Both drugs contain the same active ingredient, semaglutide.

“This allows patients with obesity who want to lose weight to have a choice between a once weekly injection or a daily tablet,” says Martin Holst Lange, chief scientific officer at Novo Nordisk.

With the soaring popularity of injectable GLP-1 drugs for weight loss, Novo Nordisk and other pharmaceutical companies have been racing to make effective pill versions that could be preferable for some patients. These drugs mimic a naturally occurring hormone in the body that acts on the brain and gut to promote a feeling of fullness.

In clinical trial results published in the New England Journal of Medicine, participants who took the pill achieved an average weight loss of 13.6 percent by 64 weeks. Nearly 30 percent of people lost 20 percent or more of their weight. The study also showed improvements in cardiovascular disease risk and physical activity levels similar to the injectable version.

While pills can sometimes be a more convenient option, patients may not always take them as prescribed, making them less effective. The clinical trial investigators estimated that in an ideal scenario where participants take the pill every day as prescribed, weight loss would be 16.6 percent—which is similar to results seen with injectable Wegovy.

Novo Nordisk first won approval for an oral semaglutide, sold under the brand name Rybelsus, in 2019 to treat type 2 diabetes. That drug has never been approved for obesity and is not as effective for weight loss as newer GLP-1 medications. The Wegovy pill is essentially a higher-dose version of Rybselsus.

“The efficacy for the obesity pill at the end of the day is driven by dose. Higher doses are required to achieve full weight-loss potential for obesity,” Lange says. The Wegovy pill is 25 milligrams while Rybelsus is 14 milligrams.

The most common side effects of oral Wegovy include nausea and vomiting, which are also side effects of the injectable version.

Novo has not disclosed the exact timeline for the drug’s launch, but Lange says it will be available sometime in the first few months of 2026. Production of the medication is already underway at Novo Nordisk’s US manufacturing sites, and the company expects to have enough of the drug to meet US demand.

Source link
#FDA #Approves #Pill #Version #Wegovy

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