what would you tell week-1 you about dose escalation
phase 2. That is the whole post, but I will justify it.
Everything else people worry about in c/glp1women is downstream of it. Titration speed, muscle cramps, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort phase 2 out first, and almost nobody does.
I say this having got it wrong for 23 months. My hs-CRP was the thing that eventually made me pay attention, which is a stupid way to learn a lesson that was in the sidebar the whole time.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
[removed by moderator]
the dosing is steep, the the food-noise thing reports are real, and nobody knows the human safety yet
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had higher mean HR changes.
[removed by moderator]
Disagree on that part. 97.9% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
Research use material only, no human-use approval anywhere. Posts must describe what happened, not instruct strangers.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had higher mean HR changes.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
Strongly agree. Heart rate escalation needs the actual data, not impressions.
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 48 weeks to accept.
Which trial arm and what was the n?
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is triple agonist. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Strongly agree. Heart rate escalation needs the actual data, not impressions.
Slight fix: the number was 98.7, not 98.9. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Crossposting this to c/bloodwork because the people who need it are not reading this community.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
- 1Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.10 comments in this branch · started by u/reta_and_regret
- 2The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had…6 comments in this branch · started by u/nadia_norgaard