You really ought to check the facts before posting something like that online.

by


Short answer: the tweet’s specific percentage claims are not supported by available primary data and are very likely false or grossly overstated. There is no evidence that 74% of all insulin used in the US comes from Denmark, that 100% of Ozempic used in the US comes from Denmark, or that 15% of all containers arriving in the US are controlled by a Danish company, and there is no official confirmation that Denmark is seriously considering “halting” all three.

https://mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/north-america-insulin-market

https://gminsights.com/industry-analysis/insulin-market

https://towardshealthcare.com/insights/insulin-analog-market-sizing

https://doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/eli-lilly-novo-nordisk-and-sanofi-must-make-insulin-pens-available-1-each
On insulin, the US market is an oligopoly dominated by three multinational firms: Eli Lilly (US‑based), Novo Nordisk (Danish), and Sanofi (French). Industry reports and NGO briefings consistently describe these three as sharing essentially the entire market; none shows Novo Nordisk at or near a 74% share of US insulin volume or value, and estimates that can be inferred from segmentation and revenue discussions typically place Novo somewhere in roughly the one‑third range, with Eli Lilly and Sanofi holding substantial shares as well. That means “74% of all insulin used in America comes from Denmark” is not backed by any recognized market data series and conflicts with the basic structure of the market.

https://mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/north-america-insulin-market

https://gminsights.com/industry-analysis/insulin-market

https://towardshealthcare.com/insights/insulin-analog-market-sizing

https://doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/eli-lilly-novo-nordisk-and-sanofi-must-make-insulin-pens-available-1-each
On Ozempic, Novo Nordisk does manufacture key active ingredients and other components in Denmark and is investing heavily in additional Danish capacity, but it is also investing billions of dollars in US manufacturing, including a large fill‑finish and pen‑assembly complex in Clayton, North Carolina. That investment is explicitly described as manufacturing Ozempic and related GLP‑1 products for the US market, implying that at least part of the US supply is produced or finished domestically and not “100% from Denmark,” and no regulatory or industry source describes US Ozempic supply as entirely Danish‑sourced.

https://biopharmadive.com/news/novo-nordisk-manufacturing-glp-1-kalundborg-denmark/699424/

https://fiercepharma.com/pharma/amid-wegovy-and-ozempic-boom-novo-eyes-new-facility-200-acre-land-buy-denmark

https://kffhealthnews.org/morning-breakout/novo-nordisk-to-build-second-us-factory-to-meet-ozempic-demand/

On shipping containers, A.P. Moller‑Maersk (Danish) is one of the largest global container lines and has a major presence in US trade, but recent industry coverage of US container import volumes and carrier shares does not show a single Danish company handling anything close to 15% of all US containerized imports across all coasts and ports. Public summaries of carrier market shares tend to show the very largest individual carriers (such as MSC or Maersk) with high‑single‑digit or low‑teen percentages within specific regions or port ranges, not a clean 15% of all containers into the US as a whole, so the tweet’s figure is at best a rounded, context‑free exaggeration and not documented in any official US trade or port statistics set.

https://globaltrademag.com/strong-december-u-s-container-imports-close-2024-but-potential-challenges-loom-for-2025/

https://joc.com/article/maersk-holds-top-spot-for-us-gulf-import-carriers-in-2024-msc-leads-for-exports-5968615
Separately, there is no sign in Danish government statements, Novo Nordisk investor communications, or mainstream business reporting of a concrete, official policy process to “halt” exports of insulin, Ozempic, or container shipping services to the United States; what appears in business coverage instead are large new investments aimed at expanding production and meeting high US demand. That does not absolutely rule out political discussion somewhere in Denmark, but there is no primary evidence that the Danish state or major Danish firms are actively planning an embargo of the kind implied by the tweet, so that part of the claim should also be treated as unsubstantiated.