You Haven't Built a GLP-1 Pathway. You've Built a Prescription Funnel.
The obesity market is racing to the bottom on price. The real competitive moat is what happens after month one.
Obesity is a chronic disease.
That’s the formal position of the World Health Organisation, which classifies it as a chronic, relapsing condition in the ICD-11. The American Medical Association recognised it as such in 2013. So did Canada, Portugal, Ireland, Germany, and Italy - which in October 2025 became the first European country to enshrine obesity as a chronic disease in law. The European Parliament has recognised it. The World Obesity Federation has recognised it.
The UK has not.
Despite having one of the highest obesity rates in Europe and an estimated NHS cost burden of £6.5 billion a year, the UK government still does not formally classify obesity as a disease. Yet a growing number of UK digital health providers are building their entire business model around GLP-1 prescribing - and in doing so, implicitly positioning themselves as chronic disease managers. They use the language of long-term care. They reference clinical pathways and ongoing treatment.
Then they design a dispensing journey geared towards first-order discounts to acquire patients and call it a clinical service.
The GLP-1 gold rush has produced a wave of digital prescribing companies calling themselves healthcare providers. But look closely and what you’ll see is a market competing on price to get patients through the door - switching incentives, discount codes and a race to the first prescription. This doesn’t sound very much like chronic disease management to me.
If obesity is truly chronic - and the global clinical consensus says it is - where are the long-term care pathways? Where’s the titration monitoring, the maintenance planning, the escalation route when someone reports side effects at 11pm on a Sunday?
Many digital health platforms treat prescribing as the finish line. Patient completes consultation, clinician reviews, prescription issued. Done. Next patient. This might have been ok for acute treatments, but GLP-1s is not an acute treatment, and prescribing is only the starting line. The real clinical product challenge begins the moment that first injection pen arrives at someone’s door.
If your product doesn’t handle what happens after the first prescription, you haven’t built a treatment pathway, you’ve built a funnel that happens to involve a POM.
The titration problem is a product problem
In the real-world, GLP-1 titration isn’t a simple linear escalation.
Patients experience nausea. They lose their appetite so dramatically it frightens them. They get constipation that no one warned them about. Some tolerate the jump from 0.5mg to 1mg without issue. Others need to hold at a dose for an extra month, or step back down entirely.
Every dose change is a patient and clinical decision point, but most products have put it on autopilot. This isn’t a prescribing decision that happens once. It’s a series of clinical micro-decisions that happen over months, often driven by patient-reported outcomes rather than clinician-initiated reviews, and the product needs to support every branch in that decision tree.
Most platforms don’t. They build a reorder flow, which is essentially a repeat prescription dressed up as ongoing care, and call it a pathway. But a reorder flow can’t distinguish between a patient who’s thriving at 1mg and a patient who’s suffering through side effects because they don’t know it’s ok to slow down.
And when the product isn’t there for those moments, the patient doesn’t complain, they just leave.
The retention cliff nobody talks about
The number that should worry every digital health company offering GLP-1s is the drop-off rate.
The real-world data on long term GLP-1 compliance is quite a contrast to the clinical trial data. Clinical trials report adherence above 85%, but in 2024, a study in the Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy found that only 32.3% of commercially insured patients without diabetes were still on their GLP-1 at one year. A population-based Danish study of 77,310 people starting semaglutide for weight loss found that more than half had stopped within twelve months, and a Prime Therapeutics analysis of long-term adherence found that just 8.1% of patients persisted for three full years.
When you look at the reasons people stop, very few are “the medication didn’t work.” One American study found that 47.6% of patients who discontinued injectable semaglutide or tirzepatide cited financial reasons. Patients who experienced adverse effects were 9% more likely to discontinue within the first year. But for the rest, unmet expectations, inadequate support, side effects they weren’t prepared for, confusion about next steps, or just a gap between prescriptions where they lost momentum.
There’s enough evidence to show that the medicine works. So what isn’t working? In digital health, it’s the product. The entire end to end pathway isn’t working well enough for patients to retain them.
When a patient pauses their treatment because of nausea and nobody checks in for three weeks, that shouldn’t just go down as a side effect problem. There’s a missed opportunity to support the patient, and in a world where every paused subscription triggers a retention email, there’s no excuse for digital health to not do the same, but through a clinical lens.
When a patient pauses their medication for a few weeks due to a holiday, and the system locks them out of the app during that period, that’s not a clinical safety feature, it’s a product experience that hasn’t considered normal life.
The platforms that will win on retention aren’t the ones offering the cheapest first month, they’re the ones building product experiences patients actually stay engaged with, and where the administrative side flexes to suit them.
So if the data is this clear, what would it actually take to build a pathway worth staying on?
What ‘good’ actually looks like
A chronic condition demands a product built around what happens after the treatment begins.
It starts with structured check-ins timed around the moments we know patients are most likely to struggle - not tied to the reorder cycle. And these shouldn’t be generic either. If your platform holds data on thousands of patients, you know that a 42-year-old woman starting semaglutide has a different side effect profile to a 58-year-old man switching from tirzepatide. You know when nausea typically peaks for her demographic, which dose escalation is most likely to cause problems, and at what point in the journey she’s statistically most at risk of dropping off. The product should be using that data to personalise when and how it checks in, not sending the same templated nudge to everyone at day 14. And definitely not waiting until the patient has already struggled through it alone, or worse, quietly stopped.
It means ongoing contraindication screening - not just at the point of first prescribing, but throughout treatment as a patient’s health profile evolves.
It means giving patients a language for what they’re experiencing. Most people starting GLP-1s have never injected anything before. They don’t know whether their nausea is ‘normal week-two nausea’ or a signal to pause. A well-designed pathway provides context, not just a free-text box asking “any side effects?”
It means building clinical logic that allows for maintaining doses and step-downs without requiring a full clinician consultation every time. The titration journey needs to be flexible, and the product needs to support that without creating safety gaps.
It means designing for the patient who goes quiet. The one who stops logging weight, stops opening the app, or doesn’t reorder. In most platforms, that patient churns. In a well-designed pathway, that silence is a clinical sign and the product should respond to it.
And critically, it means having a plan for what happens when the medication stops. Whether that’s a planned discontinuation, a switch to a different medication, or a transition to maintenance - the off-ramp needs to be as carefully designed as the on-ramp. However, most platforms have no answer for this at all.
The real competitive moat
The GLP-1 market is enormous and growing fast. Every digital health company wants a piece of it, but the barrier to entry on prescribing is low. Any CQC or GPhC-registered provider with a prescriber can join in.
In a market racing to the bottom on price, the companies still standing in five years won’t be the ones who offered the cheapest medication. They’ll be the ones who understood that engagement - real, sustained, clinically meaningful engagement - is the competitive advantage no discount code can replicate.
It requires thinking about treatment as a longitudinal relationship, not a transaction. It requires product teams who understand that the most important screen in the journey isn’t the checkout - it’s the one a patient sees at week six when they’re wondering whether to carry on.
If your obesity product roadmap ends at dispensing, you haven’t built a clinical product, you’ve built a funnel.
And if we can’t build long-term care into a weight management pathway, we need to stop calling it healthcare.
I write about building clinical products in digital health - the messy intersection of medicine, regulation, and product design. If this resonates, follow along for more.
Curious about clinical product?
Clinical Product is under-defined and poorly understood. My site clinicalproduct.uk exists to change that - with practical, experience-based guidance for clinicians moving into product and teams building regulated healthcare technology.