how much of what we believe about pharmacology actually comes from appetite threads
how much of what we believe about pharmacology actually comes from appetite threads. I would rather ask a basic question now than get this wrong quietly for two months.
Read the primary paper after arguing about the summary for a fortnight. The discussion section said almost the opposite of what the thread had concluded.
Spent an evening on the receptor distribution literature and the side-effect map suddenly stopped looking random.
Was completely wrong about the gastric emptying story in a thread here two years ago. Someone corrected me with a citation and I have not made that mistake since.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
GIP receptor biology is genuinely unsettled — there is a live argument about agonism versus antagonism at the receptor — and the clinical results are robust regardless, which is an uncomfortable and interesting position.
GLP-1 receptor agonism acts both peripherally — insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent way, slowed gastric emptying — and centrally, on appetite regulation. The central component is the better explanation for sustained intake reduction.
GLP-1 receptor agonism acts both peripherally — insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent way, slowed gastric emptying — and centrally, on appetite reg
This is the concept everything else on this board is downstream of.
the peripheral and central stories are not in competition