“To the extent utilization does abate and costs develop more favorably in 2023 than we project, that could serve as upside to our outlook for both 2023 and 2024.”

In context

“re does the 2023 year settle out, which serves as the baseline to go into 2024, and then what level of trend do we experience off that baseline. Our 2024 MA bid did contemplate a degree of higher utilization, but if trends persist at the levels we’ve experienced in the first half as contemplated in our current guidance, we will have already consumed that higher utilization assumption. If a higher level of medical cost trend then persists again in ’24 or, said differently, if we don’t see an abatement in medical cost trend, we would then be pressured on our bid assumptions. In the absence of a clear indicator that utilization is abating and out of an abundance of caution, our revised 2024 guidance assumes that we have an incremental headwind in 2024 over our revised 2023 guidance baseline. To the extent utilization does abate and costs develop more favorably in 2023 than we project, that could serve as upside to our outlook for both 2023 and 2024. AJ Rice: Okay, great. Thanks so much. Operator: Our next question comes from Lisa Gill from JP Morgan. Lisa, your line is now open. Please proceed. Lisa Gill: Great, thanks very much, and good morning. First, Shawn, I want to say thank you for revising 2024 - I think that that’s a very realistic expectation and I like the words of potential upside. With that said, let me move to my question, and that’s really around GLP1s. As I think about the different components of the business, I heard you and Dan both talk about the fact that commercial was in line, but just given the strength of what you’re seeing on your pharmacy side of your business, is there not any impact on the medical side of your business due to GLP1s, and then secondly, as we think about both GLP1s, biosimilars, the strengt”