what changed for me between week 35 and week 84
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: mechanism matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 11 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 27 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Mechanistically the bit that matters is half-life. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
central appetite signalling is real but people overweight it
central appetite signalling is real but people overweight it
Disagree on that part. 97.4% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.
Yeah, the incretin mechanism is doing the work here.
Stomach physiology changed when I moved up to 7.5mg. Gastric emptying lag is the whole story.
do not extrapolate rodent data to human dosing without saying so
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
Which paper are you quoting?
glucagon-receptor contribution is incretin for dual and triple agonism
[deleted]
cite the paper: journal, year, first author, links optional
gastric emptying is real and explains most early nausea
- 1This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please…5 comments in this branch · started by u/sig_figs_sam
- 2Mechanistically the bit that matters is half-life. It explains most of the…4 comments in this branch · started by u/ireland_drugs_pay