reading gastric emptying threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: appetite matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 21 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 35 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
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is mechanism. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
Receptor distribution explains why sulphur burps hits gastric emptying but not pharmacology.
do not extrapolate rodent data to human dosing without saying so
the half-life is receptor, affects steady state timing
central appetite signalling is real but people overweight it
Rodent, human, or in vitro?
receptor distribution matters, GLP-1 is not everywhere
- 1Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On…8 comments in this branch · started by u/gustav_vermeulen