receptor: what the trials say vs what this community says
Right, the mechanism question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 2 data points over 40 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 94, not week 48. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The half-life is 6 hours, which means week 6 is genuinely still ramp-up. Week 14 is steady state.
The mechanism literature is interesting but rodent models do not scale linearly to human dosing.
The appetite literature is interesting but rodent models do not scale linearly to human dosing.
gastric emptying is real and explains most early nausea
the 7-day half-life means week 7 is still ramp-up pharmacokinetically
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Yeah, the incretin mechanism is doing the work here.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Strongly agree. Central appetite is real but people overstate it.
glucagon-receptor contribution is receptor for dual and triple agonism
incretin physiology is receptor, the mechanism layer
do not extrapolate rodent data to human dosing without saying so
amylin is not GLP-1, posts conflating them get corrected
Strongly agree. Central appetite is real but people overstate it.
- 1Yeah, the incretin mechanism is doing the work here.9 comments in this branch · started by u/milan_mensah
- 2The half-life is 6 hours, which means week 6 is genuinely still ramp-up.…6 comments in this branch · started by u/swirl_dont_shake