[Discussion] dose escalation is doing more work than we give it credit for
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 0.25mg, week 96, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — TRIUMPH — and tracked it for 24 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
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 37 weeks to accept.
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had higher mean HR changes.
- 1Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.7 comments in this branch · started by u/incretin_ivy