371–380 of 431 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hasn't this mostly been debunked? You lose muscle mass because you lost mass overall, and whether you lost it too quickly or not is not the major factor. AFAIK maintaining muscle mass while losing fat is borderline impossible for anyone who isn't extremely fat and/or very disproportionate composition to begin with.
GLP1 destroy muscle tissue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You can at least draw a somewhat tortured connection between "anti vaccine" and opting out of receiving a specific vaccine (for logical reasons, with your doctors approval, though are they even a real doctor if they approved such a thing?). But using the word "jab" or criticising the medical industry making you anti vaccine is the kind of thing I was talking about when I mentioned literacy. The vibe you're getting is…
Peptides are a revolution and you don't need to know how they work to know that they work (for various people for various conditions). There is a tension between empiricism and fundamentalism with much of medical science focusing on fundamentalism. Now with the ability to collect and search large amounts of empirical data and communicate it peer-to-peer people are picking up on a lot of things that work without knowi…
Non blinded self experimentation is not a useful branch of empiricism. I had an ME/CFS patient that had tried 100s of things and documented the effects thoroughly. She had a quite impressive list. Roughly 30% had had an effect to begin with, but the trend she observed was that it lasted for around a month at most. Placebo was her overall conclusion, but she occasionally got relief anyways so we both agreed that there…
For medical research, the goal is to find general practices that will broadly help, and identify risks with the intervention. Even then, with many interventions, it's understood that they will effect people differently.
For individuals, they don't care about variation in communities, or standard medical practices, they are looking for relief for their specific condition.
Of course, declaring that just because something worked for one person, it should work for others, is wrong in both camps.
I feel like a big part of the disconnect here, and a big reason why people are talking past each other, is that they actually have different goals, and aren't really aware of that difference.
I used retatrutide for weight loss and went from 199.3 lbs to just under 175 lbs. I kept daily notes through the process. Here's a quick AI one-paragraph summary if you're curious: https://pastebin.com/XACNYKvs Overall I'm quite pleased with the effects and many of the properties of this treatment that people dislike are actually properties I was looking for. Essentially, for pharmacological interventions I want impe…
> Rough cost for the retatrutide is $1.25/mg. Even with free healthcare that seems like a foolish place to save money when very widely used alternatives exist in the regulated market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jor.21107 Among others. If you read the paper, it's actually apparent that there's little difference between i.p. and oral administration in terms of efficacy -- both were roughly equally effective in improving MCL ligament healing. Admittedly the paper's in rats -- as are 99% of the others -- as there's no incentive for anybody to run human trials.
You should note that your study is not controlled. There are two groups, those with oral administration those with sub-q administration. There is not group without administration. This means you can't say that oral vs injected is "equally effective" because you can't assert that BPC 157 is effective at all. You can't tease out the effect size because you don't know if any or all of the MCL ligament healing was done v…
There were control groups.
> Methods:
> [administration] as follows: (i) BPC 157 10 mg or 10 ng/kg or saline 5.0 ml/kg (controls), intraperitoneally, or (ii) BPC 157 in neutral cream (1.0 mg dissolved in distilled water/g commercial neutral cream) or commercial neutral cream (controls), as a thin layer, locally, at the site of injury, administered once daily with the first application 30 min after surgery and the final application 24 h before sacrifice; (iii) BPC 157 0.16 mg/ml or nothing (controls) in the drinking water (12 ml/day/rat) until sacrifice.
There was a big difference vs. the control groups.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can at least draw a somewhat tortured connection between "anti vaccine" and opting out of receiving a specific vaccine (for logical reasons, with your doctors approval, though are they even a real doctor if they approved such a thing?). But using the word "jab" or criticising the medical industry making you anti vaccine is the kind of thing I was talking about when I mentioned literacy. The vibe you're getting is…
[flagged]
That's what anti vaccine means, despite all the efforts to redefine it. It doesn't mean "won't recite the marketing materials for a specific pharmaceutical product when prompted".
I'm not inclined to be a guinea pig for these. I suspect maybe later in my child's life they will have been proven long-term safe (or not). I'll be old or dead at that point. I'm really wary of putting anything not known to be standard food or medicine into my body.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
No, all I have to do to make it clear is say "I'm not opposed to vaccines as some kind of principle, ideological or otherwise", and then you can either believe me or not. That's what anti vaccine means, despite all the efforts to redefine it. It doesn't mean "won't recite the marketing materials for a specific pharmaceutical product when prompted".
I'm here for two probably contradictory comments. The first is collagen: I'd love to see Lowe's take on recent peer review which says boosting oral collagen does appear to show signs of improved joint pain and skin resilience. Obviously modulated through how protein deprived you are, but for older people, eating enough protein can be an issue: it's not rapidly absorbed so you need 3 squares a day to get to the higher…
Note that there is research showing that whey protein powder has exactly the same effects as collagen, for much lower price. Mechanistically it makes sense, as I understand the ingredients in Collagen are largely a subset of the ingredients in whey powder, albeit at different ratios.
I always wondered if there were nutrients we can’t measure though, because collagen is typically made from skin or bones whereas whey protein is dairy. Even though both have similar “nutrition facts” maybe there are some unmeasurable differences. Both are highly processed though so who knows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that there is research showing that whey protein powder has exactly the same effects as collagen, for much lower price. Mechanistically it makes sense, as I understand the ingredients in Collagen are largely a subset of the ingredients in whey powder, albeit at different ratios.
it is the same if you base it just on the amino acid profiles, they are both just proteins with different amounts. I always wondered if there were nutrients we can’t measure though, because collagen is typically made from skin or bones whereas whey protein is dairy. Even though both have similar “nutrition facts” maybe there are some unmeasurable differences. Both are highly processed though so who knows.