week 68 check-in — 34kg down, nausea manageable, one thing confusing me
Six-word version is the title — week 68 check-in — 34kg down, nausea manageable, one thing confusing me — and the rest is context.
week 68 and 34kg. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour.
Complementary mechanisms are the rationale for pairing: satiety signalling alongside incretin signalling, rather than more agonism at the same receptor.
Combination and monotherapy arms must be read separately. Efficacy and tolerability both differ substantially between them and summaries routinely blur the two.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Independent purity data on this compound is sparse compared with the older molecules, simply because far fewer members have paid for testing. Sparse data means wide uncertainty, not a verdict.
Independent result added to the log. Thank you for paying for it — there are very few on this compound.
I would not extrapolate the tolerability profile from the monotherapy arm to the combination. The trials report them separately for a reason.
I would not extrapolate the tolerability profile from the monotherapy arm to the combination.
This is the distinction that keeps this board honest — different axis, not a stronger version of the same one.
amylin analogue, different receptor family, different story
Which trial and which readout?
Correction: that is the combination programme, not the monotherapy readout. Different arms, different numbers.
How many separate lots has anyone here tested?
satiety signalling rather than incretin signalling
long-acting amylin is the whole point of the molecule
Disagree — you are quoting a combination arm as though it were monotherapy. Those are different results.
Which receptor family are you attributing that effect to?
Is there any independent purity data on this compound that you have seen?
do not assume the dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards transfer
do not assume the dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards transfer
plain_titration is right that the evidence base here is thin. Conclusions should be held loosely.
the co-agonism argument is about complementary mechanisms
Small fix — amylin analogue, not a GLP-1 analogue. The whole mechanism argument changes on that word.