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?
Archived. This submission is more than a year old. Votes and new comments are closed, and some of the advice in it may have been superseded — check the community wiki for the current version.
2.9k
c/glp1science·posted 1 year ago by u/laila_almeida

appetite: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1

Speculation Well Actually ×3 Slow Clap ×1 Cold Box ×2

Confession thread, sort of.

I went from 12.5mg to 5mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 10 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway.

So now I have sulphur burps I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.

Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 88 reads it before doing the same thing.

3,265 up / 322 down91% upvoted27 commentsid y7cikt3 Jul 2025

27 comments

21 in this archive, depth 4

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/gradient_goblin585 points·1 year ago

rodent appetite tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans

replysharereportpermalink
u/aa_analysis_andy487 points·1 year ago

Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with mechanism, not with what you concluded.

replysharereportpermalink
u/neha_krastev316 points·1 year ago

This is correct. Rodent data is investigational, not predictive.

replysharereportpermalink
u/devils_advocate_d203 points·1 year ago

Is that mechanism or speculation?

replysharereportpermalink
u/fatima_kowalski99 points·1 year ago

amylin is not GLP-1, posts conflating them get corrected

replysharereportpermalink
u/laila_almeidaOP54 points·1 year ago

Strongly agree. Central appetite is real but people overstate it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/whois_wanda330 points·1 year ago·edited

Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.

replysharereportpermalink
u/milos_vanhecke178 points·1 year ago

glucagon-receptor contribution is incretin for dual and triple agonism

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →
u/incretin_ivypharmacology198 points·1 year ago

Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_danquah124 points·1 year ago

rodent incretin tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans

replysharereportpermalink
u/nadia_fonseca102 points·1 year ago

rodent incretin tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans

Disagree on that part. 97.4% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/milos_vanhecke159 points·1 year ago

cite the paper: journal, year, first author, links optional

replysharereportpermalink
u/sanne_delgado89 points·1 year ago

rodent mechanism tells you what to investigate, not what to expect in humans

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (4) →
u/slow_logbook108 points·1 year ago

Is that mechanism or speculation?

replysharereportpermalink
u/laila_almeidaOP-9 points·1 year ago

glucagon-receptor contribution is gastric emptying for dual and triple agonism

replysharereportpermalink
u/gastric_emptying_gMOD99 points·1 year ago

Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/glp1science

The mechanism layer: incretin physiology, receptor distribution, gastric emptying, central appetite signalling, glucagon-receptor contribution, amylin co-agonism, and the pharmacokinetics that make weekly dosing possible. Papers get cited by journal and year or they get a [needs source] reply.

50kmembers
95submissions
Oct 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/glp1science rules
  1. Cite the paper: journal, year, first author. Links optional, citation mandatory.
  2. Mechanistic speculation is welcome if flaired as speculation.
  3. No extrapolating rodent data to human dosing without saying that is what you are doing.
  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.