GLP-1 Study Shows Record Weight Loss, But Relies on Controversial Drugs

COLUMBUS, Ohio – March 12, 2026 – New research is highlighting the dramatic potential of combining GLP-1 medications with intensive, virtual support, with one telehealth company reporting average weight loss far exceeding results from many original pharmaceutical trials. However, the studies, which show patients losing up to 26.5% of their body weight, are built on a foundation that is drawing increasing scrutiny from federal regulators: the widespread use of unapproved, compounded versions of blockbuster drugs like Ozempic and Mounjaro.

Two peer-reviewed studies published in the medical journal Obesity Pillars detail the outcomes of over 2,000 patients treated through Ivim Health, a national telehealth provider. The findings suggest that when GLP-1 therapy is wrapped in a comprehensive care model, the results can be profound. But they also raise urgent questions about the trade-offs between accessibility, efficacy, and safety in the booming weight-loss market.

A New Benchmark for Weight Loss?

The results presented in the studies are striking. In a cohort of patients receiving tirzepatide-based therapy, the average weight loss reached 22.74% at one year and an impressive 26.54% at 72 weeks. A parallel study on semaglutide-based therapy reported nearly identical success, with patients shedding an average of 21.8% of their body weight at 68 weeks. Across both groups, over 99% of participants achieved what is considered clinically meaningful weight loss.

These figures are significant when placed in the context of both clinical trials and other real-world data. For example, the landmark SURMOUNT-1 trial for tirzepatide (marketed as Zepbound) showed an average weight loss of 20.9% at 72 weeks. While Ivim's results are higher, the more telling comparison is with other real-world analyses. A recent Cleveland Clinic study, for instance, found that the average weight loss for GLP-1 users in a typical clinical setting was only 8.7% after one year, hampered by issues like inconsistent dosing and patients discontinuing treatment.

Ivim Health attributes its superior outcomes to its "individualized virtual integrative medicine" protocol. According to the company, patients in the studies had an average of 13 touchpoints with their care team annually. This high-touch model includes intensive medical oversight for personalized dose adjustments, real-time support for managing side effects, and integrated lifestyle coaching on nutrition and behavior.

"What these studies demonstrate is what's achievable when you build comprehensive care around GLP-1 therapy," said Dr. Jessica Duncan, Chief Medical Officer at Ivim Health and the lead author of the studies, in a press release. "When patients have consistent access to their medical team, when treatment adapts to their individual response, when they receive integrated support — outcomes were observed to improve in these cohorts."

The Compounded Conundrum

Beneath the impressive top-line numbers lies a critical detail: the vast majority of patients in both studies were not using the FDA-approved, brand-name versions of these drugs. According to the publications, 91.7% of the tirzepatide cohort and 95.4% of the semaglutide cohort received compounded formulations.

Compounded drugs are custom-made by pharmacies and are not reviewed or approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for safety, quality, or effectiveness. While legally permitted under certain conditions—such as a specific patient allergy or a national drug shortage—their widespread use for weight loss has become a major point of contention. The FDA has recently declared that the national shortages of semaglutide and tirzepatide have been resolved, effectively ending the period of enforcement discretion that allowed for their mass compounding.

Federal regulators and drug manufacturers have repeatedly issued warnings about the risks associated with these unapproved versions. The FDA has received numerous reports of adverse events, including some requiring hospitalization, due to dosing errors from confusing product concentrations. There are also concerns about product quality, with reports of contamination, improper storage, and the inclusion of untested additives. Eli Lilly, the maker of Mounjaro and Zepbound, has sued several entities for selling compounded products and has warned of finding "significant levels of an impurity" in some compounded tirzepatide.

The reliance on these formulations complicates the interpretation of Ivim's results. While the outcomes are positive, they were achieved using products that lack the rigorous safety and quality assurances of their FDA-approved counterparts, placing the model on uncertain regulatory ground.

Telehealth and the Future of Obesity Care

The studies also serve as a powerful case study for the potential of virtual care to deliver high-touch, specialized medical services at a national scale. By leveraging a telehealth platform with nearly 100 providers across all 50 states, Ivim Health has demonstrated a model that can expand access to obesity care, a field with a shortage of specialists.

This approach addresses many of the practical barriers that prevent patients from achieving optimal results in traditional healthcare settings, such as infrequent appointments and a lack of integrated support for lifestyle changes.

"Through my background in cardiac surgery, I saw what comprehensive protocols achieved in surgical patients," noted Dr. Taylor Kantor, Chief Innovation Officer and co-founder of Ivim Health. "What these cohorts demonstrate is that modern telehealth can deliver that level of specialty care at scale."

A Model Under Scrutiny

The research presents a compelling, if complex, picture of the future of obesity treatment. On one hand, it provides strong evidence that a structured, supportive care environment is a critical factor in unlocking the full potential of GLP-1 medications. On the other, its reliance on compounded drugs highlights a growing rift in the market between regulated, brand-name products and a sprawling gray market of cheaper, unapproved alternatives.

Independent experts acknowledge the value of the care model itself. Dr. Daniel J Rosen, founder of Weight Zen in New York, who was not involved in the research, stated that the data "further solidifies the notion that a patient care model emphasizing regular clinical access to providers... can lead to superior weight loss outcomes." However, he also noted the limitations of an observational study and the need for controlled trials to firmly establish causation.

For patients, providers, and healthcare systems, the findings force a difficult conversation. Maximizing the value of revolutionary but expensive GLP-1 therapies may require significant investment in care infrastructure. The question that remains is whether the impressive results demonstrated in these studies can be replicated safely and sustainably within the bounds of federal regulation.