Doesn't this contradict your findings?

I'm glad you've asked because this is where I get to say, oh, here's a different way we could answer that question.

So that paper that you're referring to is a simulation study.

And so you could have an answer off of let's actually look at what people are doing.

And then another way to answer the question is what might we anticipate by thinking of a thought process? A thought question is, suppose that everybody who is clinically appropriate for GLP-1s gets access to GLP-1s today.

And let's suppose the benefits they're going to see are going to be as we see in clinical trials.

That is, adherence is not a problem, access is not a problem, all the ways in which they are going to take it all as the clinical trials and that they are going to see these benefits.

What was your proposal to fix this problem?