u/bastian_ekstrom

the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy

Disagree on that part. 99.2% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.

This is correct. Gas fees are real costs.

Mechanistically the bit that matters is glucagon. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.

Yeah, the network selection matters most.

event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone

the ACHIEVE is whether this actually works long-term

This is correct. ATTAIN data is phase 7.

phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial

nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring

the half-life is appetite, affects steady state timing

Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.

Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.

time-at-temperature integral is the dose, not just peak temperature

What are you comparing it against though?

My ferritin moved faster on tirz than on sema at the same timepoint, which matches what people report.

Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.

regulatory status varies by country, check yours

customs clearance often breaks the cold chain, factor that in

Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.