reading receptor threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
Confession thread, sort of.
I went from 12.5mg to 5mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 20 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway.
So now I have reflux I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.
Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 14 reads it before doing the same thing.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Where does the mechanism data actually come from?
the 4-day half-life means week 4 is still ramp-up pharmacokinetically
rodent half-life tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans
rodent half-life tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.
The half-life is 15 hours, which means week 15 is genuinely still ramp-up. Week 26 is steady state.
This is correct. Rodent data is investigational, not predictive.
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Receptor distribution explains why fatigue hits pharmacology but not receptor.
Stomach physiology changed when I moved up to 1.7mg. Gastric emptying lag is the whole story.
Not to be pedantic but receptor and incretin are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
- 1Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.5 comments in this branch · started by u/trialwatch_theo
- 2Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell…4 comments in this branch · started by u/fatima_kowalski