[Results] 78 weeks on 12.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring
Check-in as promised in the title: 78 weeks on 12.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring.
78 weeks and 12.5mg. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour.
Reference intervals are typically the central 95% of a reference population. By construction one person in twenty falls outside one on any given test without anything being wrong.
ApoB counts atherogenic particles rather than the cholesterol they carry, which is why it can diverge from LDL-C and why it is the addition most worth making.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use and nothing here should be read as a recommendation to use it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The confounding problem, stated plainly, because this board keeps stepping on it.
Substantial weight loss moves lipids, liver enzymes, insulin sensitivity markers and several others in its own right. If you are losing weight while taking something, any change in those markers has at least two candidate explanations and you cannot separate them from your own panel.
What you can do is standardise, take a baseline, keep the series long, and be honest in your posts about what is and is not attributable. The threads that say "this compound did X to my ApoB" almost never have the design to support the claim, mine included.
Push back: a value just outside a reference interval is a common finding in healthy people. It is a reason to repeat.
Right, and weight loss itself moves several markers, so attribution is harder than these threads assume.
That is a non-fasting value and the interval you are comparing it against is a fasting one.
Have you taken this to whoever ordered it?
Yes — same lab, same fasting state, same rough time of day, or the comparison is doing nothing.
ask whether the lab changed its assay between your two draws
Compared two draws across two labs and spent a week worrying before finding out the assays were different.