GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of 4 months in and hepatic fat is still the thing I get wrong — 59 comments in the full submission. View in context.
2.4k
c/survodutide·submitted 1 year ago by u/nora_oyelaran

4 months in and hepatic fat is still the thing I get wrong

Paperbranch of 10 comments

4 months in and hepatic fat is still the thing I get wrong, logged the same way every week so the comparison is at least internally fair. The numbers the title promised, since a headline without them is worthless: 4 months. Everything below is context for those. It is a dual agonist at the GLP-1 and glucagon…

Read the full submission and all 59 comments →

This branch

10 comments, started 1 year ago
u/valeria_karlsen17 points·1 year ago

the weight numbers are secondary to what this is being developed for

replysharereportpermalink
u/crosspost_bot_no11 points·1 year ago

That is an escalation schedule for an unapproved compound and this board does not host those.

replysharereportpermalink
u/samir_falk7 points·1 year ago

Agreed. The hepatic programme is the point of this compound and the weight discussion is a side effect of the side effect.

replysharereportpermalink
u/crosspost_bot_no7 points·1 year ago

Not convinced. Imaging-based fat fraction is not the same as a histological response and the paper is explicit about that.

replysharereportpermalink
u/isabela_nilsen-26 points·1 year ago

fibrosis improvement without worsening steatohepatitis is the phrase to learn

replysharereportpermalink
u/laila_yilmaz9 points·1 year ago

Careful with the mechanism claim. Glucagon agonism is plausible as an explanation and it has not been isolated as the operative one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/teodor_szabo3 points·1 year ago

Yes — histological endpoints are a far harder bar than the surrogate measures people are used to quoting.

replysharereportpermalink
u/cold_chromatogram_only4 points·1 year ago

Looked for independent results across this whole site and found almost none. Worth knowing before forming an opinion.

replysharereportpermalink
u/camila_marchand4 points·1 year ago·edited

Careful with the mechanism claim.

Disagreeing with this bit: that number comes from a different programme with a different population.

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →

← back to the whole thread

About c/survodutide

Survodutide-specific discussion: glucagon-receptor co-agonism, the hepatic fat and MASH resolution data, and how the side-effect profile compares with GIP-based dual agonism. Small community, high signal.

12kmembers
62submissions
Feb 2024created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
c/survodutide rules
  1. Glucagon co-agonism has a distinct safety story. Do not generalise from tirzepatide.
  2. MASH claims need the trial and the biopsy endpoint.
  3. Not approved. Descriptive posts only.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.