Oppenheimer sees limited near-term impact from Gilead HIV approval
Oppenheimer says that while the firm generally agrees with consensus that Yeztugo 'has multi-blockbuster potential,' its model assumes a slow ramp that initially cannibalizes Descvoy's market share. The injectable Apretude has had a sluggish launch, but Yeztugo is different in requiring only two clinic visits a year, the analyst tells investors in a research note. Opco believes a negative Supreme Court decision in Kennedy versus Braidwood 'would most certainly create near-term headwinds.' Given the current political environment, adoption into more commercially mainstream markets will be needed to realize Yeztugo's full potential, contends the firm. It reiterates an Outperform rating on Gilead (GILD) with a $125 price target
Confident Investing Starts Here:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Axios-Ipsos poll: Americans want to force presidents to share health records
Eight in 10 Americans want legally required and publicly released cognitive tests and disease screenings for U.S. presidents — and age limits on the presidency, according to the latest Axios-Ipsos American Health Index. About 3 in 4 say politicians aren't honest about their health, and that presidents should be legally required to share their medical records with the public. Why it matters: The issue of presidents' health has become particularly poignant in light of the decline of Joe Biden, who was 82 when he left office, and the return of Donald Trump, who's now 79 and was the oldest president to be inaugurated in U.S. history. Trump rarely has offered glimpses into his health records. His team released a memo after his physical in April that pronounced him in "excellent health," but political foes such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom have questioned Trump's mental fitness and whether he's up to the job. Biden's White House physician had claimed that Biden was in great shape for a man of his age. But during his presidency, Biden's staff tried to conceal his declining health. Biden's recent cancer diagnosis has drawn new attention to the lack of legal requirements for public officials to disclose their medical status. What we're watching: Democrats surveyed in the poll appear to favor such disclosures slightly more than Republicans — and, overall, Americans are less interested in forcing past presidents to share their records than requiring current ones to do so. What they're saying:"The American public is sending a very clear signal that they don't trust the information they're receiving, that it's not sufficient, and that public officials should be held to a higher standard when it comes to being forthcoming about their health," said Mallory Newall, Ipsos vice president for U.S. public affairs. "Americans want more transparency about their elected officials' health. They're looking for a younger generation to serve." The big picture: The balance between public officials' medical privacy and the public's right to know has swung sharply toward more disclosure, the poll showed. It found strong bipartisan appetite for increased transparency about public officials' health, and for a maximum age at which officeholders and Supreme Court justices can serve. (Respondents were not asked what age the maximum age should be.) By the numbers: 72% of Americans strongly or somewhat disagree with the idea that most elected officials are honest with the American public about their health. 74% overall agree that there should be a legal requirement for any current president to share their health records. The public is much more divided on former presidents' health, with just 40% agreeing there should be a legal requirement to share their health records and 57% opposed. About 8 in 10 Americans broadly favor age limits for Supreme Court justices and members of Congress, as well as for presidents. More Democrats (83%) favor a legal requirement that the current president share health records than Republicans (70%) or independents (72%). The same goes for age limits and for mandatory cognitive screening and disease testing with sharable results. But in each case, more than three-quarters of Republicans, Democrats and independents support those requirements. Between the lines: Public officials aren't held to any legal standards for disclosing their medical status. While America is getting older and life expectancies generally have increased, questions about aging politicians' fitness to serve and their ability to make critical judgements have moved to the forefront. That's partly driven by a nonstop news cycle that keeps many in the limelight and can expose frailties. But the rules for talking about their health are mostly rooted in traditions like the president's annual physical. Former White House physician Jeffrey Kuhlman has argued for a battery of cognitive tests, rather than a screening exam, to assess presidents' memory, language and problem-solving skills. Methodology: This Axios/Ipsos Poll was conducted June 13-16, 2025, by Ipsos' KnowledgePanel®. This poll is based on a nationally representative probability sample of 1,104 general population adults age 18 or older.
New York Times
3 hours ago
- New York Times
Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Transgender Care for Minors
Hosted by Natalie Kitroeff Produced by Shannon M. LinNina Feldman and Stella Tan Edited by Devon Taylor and Lisa Tobin Original music by Diane WongDan PowellMarion Lozano and Elisheba Ittoop Engineered by Chris Wood The Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling this week that effectively upheld bans on some medical treatments for transgender youth in nearly half of the United States. Azeen Ghorayshi, who covers the intersection of sex, gender and science for The New York Times, explains the scientific debate over the care, and why the court's decision leaves families more in the dark than ever. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Azeen Ghorayshi is a reporter covering the intersection of sex, gender and science for The New York Times. The Supreme Court's decision, allowing Tennessee and other states to ban gender-affirming care for minors, was a crushing blow for the transgender rights movement. 'The Protocol' podcast explains where youth gender medicine originated and how it became a target of the Trump administration. There are a lot of ways to listen to 'The Daily.' Here's how. We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode's publication. You can find them at the top of the page. The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon M. Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez, Brendan Klinkenberg, Chris Haxel, Maria Byrne, Anna Foley and Caitlin O'Keefe. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam, Nick Pitman and Kathleen O'Brien.
Axios
3 hours ago
- Axios
Axios-Ipsos poll: Americans embracing food regulation
Americans broadly support some of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s food regulation agenda — from removing artificial dyes to increasing safety and labeling — though they distrust Kennedy 2-to-1, according to the latest Axios-Ipsos American Health Index. The big picture: 87% of respondents said the government should do more to make food safe through guidelines, labeling or reduced pesticide exposure. Six in 10 want to remove artificial dyes from foods — some entirely and some as long as it doesn't significantly impact food costs and looks. Seven in 10 want to strengthen food safety inspections. Why it matters: These ideas are drawing support largely across partisan lines, despite politicization and many consumers' tendencies to act counter to their stated interests. Just 31% of Americans say they trust health information from Kennedy. Just 23% say they regularly eat organic fruits or vegetables. Half said they've eaten fast food or processed food at least a few days in the past week. What they're saying: "When you strip away all of the politically charged rhetoric… there is a lot of alignment," said Mallory Newall, Ipsos vice president for U.S. public affairs. "But framing and language matter," Newall said. "In theory, there is agreement that our food guidelines need to be updated and made safer for us. But there's a certain level of distrust across the board on how the government actually is going about this. And I do think it's being politicized." By the numbers: 47% of Republican respondents said they favor removing all artificial dyes from foods, even if it makes foods cost more — compared with 42% of independents and 26% of Democrats. 23% of Republicans, 18% of independents and 28% of Democrats favored removing some artificial dyes but wanted to minimize changes to food costs and appearances. Others favored food labeling that lets consumers decide, or said they didn't know or wanted no change. 48% respondents overall think U.S. health policies should focus primarily on healthy foods and lifestyles and disease prevention while 27% say they should primarily be around research to develop new drugs and treatments. That compared to 41% and 38%, respectively, when we asked the question at the beginning of March. And 7 in 10 Americans strongly or somewhat agree with the statement American children are on too many prescription drugs. Respondents were almost evenly split on whether COVID-19 booster vaccines are safe for pregnant women. But a majority (54%) said they don't trust the current COVID-19 vaccine recommendations set by the federal government, which exclude healthy pregnant women. Methodology: This Axios/Ipsos Poll was conducted June 13-16, 2025, by Ipsos' KnowledgePanel®. This poll is based on a nationally representative probability sample of 1,104 general population adults age 18 or older.
