co-agonism — my 6-week log, condensed into one table
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 0.25mg, week 28, constipation present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — REDEFINE — and tracked it for 21 weeks.
Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted it. So I am putting it here rather than presenting it as a finding. If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something.
Not medical advice, obviously. This is one person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
[removed by moderator]
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
not approved anywhere, keep posts descriptive, not instructional
This is correct. The co-agonism is real.
research use only, no human protocols in posts
[removed by moderator]
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 65 weeks to accept.
Yeah, amylin is doing different work than GLP-1.
Rodent or human data?
amylin is not a GLP-1, posts conflating them get corrected
Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone has to re-explain it.
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
The research community is small on cagrilintide. Forum lore changes faster than data.
Yeah, amylin is doing different work than GLP-1.
amylin receptor distribution is different from GLP-1
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
CagriSema is a fixed combo in trials, not user-mixed
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
The practical rule people converge on is 28 days at fridge temperature after first puncture, and that comes from the preservative, not the peptide.
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
REDEFINE phase 23 readouts are interesting but 23 person cagrilintide is different from 23 trial cagrilintide.
not approved anywhere, keep posts descriptive, not instructional
The satiety on amylin analogs is described as physically different. GLP-1 reduces appetite noise, amylin does co-agonism.
I am going to push back on this slightly.
Small correction: the trial was 5 weeks, not 20. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
REDEFINE readouts are phase 23 data
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
- 1Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On…10 comments in this branch · started by u/noor_vermeulen
- 2Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone…8 comments in this branch · started by u/nz_unfunded