[Lab] SGN survo — VendorInvestigate came back 99.0% against a claimed 99.1%
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 7.5mg, week 45, constipation present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — biopsy — and tracked it for 8 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
This is correct. Do not generalise from tirzepatide.
[removed by moderator]
[removed by moderator]
Disagree on that part. 98.1% and 95.1% on the same vial is normal.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
glucagon injection is a different vector than GLP-1
Maintenance for 8 months now. Weight moves within about 3kg and the dose is a quarter of what it peaked at.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
glucagon co-agonism has a different safety story
MASH claims need the trial and the biopsy endpoint
Sweden here. Waited 18 months on a list, gave up, went private, and the total cost was roughly what I expected.
Stalled for 20 weeks, changed nothing, and it started moving again on week 71.
Sweden here.
Adding to this: biopsy is doing more work than the comment implies.
Not to be pedantic but biopsy and survodutide are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
glucagon injection is a different vector than GLP-1
Strongly agree. The safety story is separate.
Week 84 for me and the honest summary is: 30kg down, reflux manageable, and I have thought about food maybe four times today.
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes.
Disagree on that part. 97.9% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
rodent glucagon is investigation only
the GLP-1/glucagon dual is hepatic fat, different from GIP/GLP-1
the MASH indication changes the risk calculus
the MASH indication changes the risk calculus
Disagree on that part. 98.1% and 97.9% on the same vial is normal.
Yeah, glucagon co-agonism is genuinely different.
the GLP-1/glucagon dual is hepatic fat, different from GIP/GLP-1
Yeah, glucagon co-agonism is genuinely different.
- 1Week 84 for me and the honest summary is: 30kg down, reflux manageable, and…10 comments in this branch · started by u/kaia_cabrera
- 2This is correct. Do not generalise from tirzepatide.9 comments in this branch · started by u/old_account_2023