From my experience, most insurance companies, probably because
of cost, will not cover GH without having first eliminated any other
mitigating circumstances / causes. A lengthy processes.
I once inquired about GH with my doctor. She was reluctant to prescribe,
saying the long term effects, in adults, is not fully understood and was
fought with unknown risks at this point in time. And I respect that
opinion, did not push back.
I have had my GH levels tested and they came back in normal range so
for me, it was clearly a no-brainer.
I honestly don't understand doctor reluctance to prescribe hormones. These are substances which are already in our bodies, yet tell them you're depressed and they'll whip out a Rx for an anti-depressant in half a second, and these anti-depressants are extremely harmful to our bodies. For the most part, I believe that most doctors don't know one damned thing about hormones except from the small excerpts they read in their medical books.
If you're in the normal range, I wouldn't expect to get a Rx for GH unless you're able to find a really loose doctor who believes GH is good for everyone (IMO). Now if you actually test low, then I would expect to get it. I've actually tested low for GH recently by way of an IGF test, and the doc looked at me and said he wouldn't give me an Rx because I was too muscular. Didn't matter that my test was low, which I thought was an indicator that you actually need the stuff. I said, "so let me make sure I'm clear.. I tested low which indicates that I need GH, but you're not going to prescribe it to me because I'm too muscular?" His answer was Yes. He was actually biased against me because of my physique.
I did at one point in the past (around 2008) have a script from a doc in California for serostims, but I couldn't fill it because of the cost at the time which would have been close to $10K, I kid you not. I still have the paper script to show docs that I was prescribed GH at one time.
Why do people say that?
It never made sense to me.
You need to have some legitimate muscle wasting disease (in which case bbing would be the last thing you do). I know oncologists who don't even prescribe steroids actively to people undergoing heavy chemo/radiation, let alone a healthy adult.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
?? Why do you have to have a muscle wasting disease to be prescribed a hormone? For me, I wasn't producing hardly enough testosterone at age 30, had levels testing at 310 and below, down to 192. I've been on replacement ever since (18 yrs+), and I've also had doctors that seemed to fight me being on even with levels testing below the limit when I came down for testing.
That makes sense. There has to be a clear reason to prescribe it. I'm actually having trouble with my insurance company paying for some of my Test. At least it's relatively cheap!
I have what is considered excellent insurance but they will not cover my doctor prescribed TRT
I've found that often even with the best insurance, they won't cover hormone Rx's unless you have your doctor send in a written letter stating that you need to be on whatever particular hormone. A good pharmacist let me in on that one. My insurance pays for my testosterone Rx, my copay is $15. GH is sort of the same way EXCEPT that if you get a Rx for it, it MUST come from an endocrinologist or insurance will NOT pay for it. That was something my family doctor let me know. He's a good doc and would prescribe GH for me himself if he were more comfortable with it, but that if it did come from him, I'd have to cover the cost. Little rules here and there we don't know, eh?