The use of GLP-1 medications for weight loss has recently surged in the United States, with about 12% of adults using them for all purposes and nearly two-thirds of those adults using them for weight loss as a primary or secondary goal.1 U.S. employers have responded to this rise, and its attendant costs, in a variety of ways, depending on their specific situations and goals. Some organizations with higher turnover may not see the benefit of covering these medications, as the cost savings are a long-term issue. Others who want to maximize the benefit are creating screening, adherence and programs to support weight loss as conditions of coverage.
But how has the rest of the world responded to GLP-1s, and how should employers — especially multinational companies — respond? As with any global perspective on healthcare, the answers vary due to cultural, regulatory and systemic differences. We explore how employers can stay ahead of this evolving topic.
Diverse Systems Lead to Diverse Needs
Knowing the scope of the problem, the costs of various solutions and the specific risk to employee health and productivity faced by organizations is the basis for any population health strategy. This starts with the data an employer may already have on hand, including health claims and absentee information.
Employees in many countries are not expecting access to GLP-1 medications through their employers at nearly the same rate as they are in the U.S. For example, a recent survey showed 71% of employees in the U.S. thought covering GLP-1s for weight loss was important,2 while in England that number was just over 40%.3 This trend mirrors consumer demand for GLP-1s for weight loss, which is higher in the U.S. compared to some other countries.
There are a few reasons for this, including how healthcare systems are structured in different countries, the types of benefits employees expect and typically receive from their employers and the scope of obesity within each region. In the U.S., healthcare insurance is heavily subsidized by employers, whereas in countries with national healthcare systems, the employers’ contributions are more indirect. Employers in countries with national healthcare have an interest in the cost aspect given payroll contributions help fund healthcare, but they have less direct control over whether specific medications are covered.
Obesity and GLP-1 Usage in Selected Countries
| Country |
Percent of Obesity in Adult Population4 |
Adult Population Using GLP-1s for Weight Loss
(or Type 2 Diabetes with Weight Loss as Secondary Goal) |
| Australia |
31.7% |
2.0% as of mid-20255 |
| Canada |
33.5% |
3.9% as of 20246 |
| Denmark |
18.7% |
9.1% as of 20257 |
| Germany |
19% |
9.6% as of 20268 |
| Saudi Arabia |
23.1% |
14.2% as of Dec. 2024 (limited study)9 |
| United Kingdom |
26% |
2.9% as of 202510 |
| United States |
40.3% |
7.4% as of 202611 |