am I the only one who found orforglipron harder than the injections
am I the only one who found orforglipron harder than the injections. If this has been answered properly somewhere, link me and I will delete.
Daily rather than weekly sounds trivial until you think about what a missed dose means in each case.
Milligram comparisons across molecule classes are meaningless. Potency is a property of the molecule at its receptor, not of the number on the label.
Read both programme names carefully after mixing them up in a comment and being politely corrected.
That is everything I have. The rest is opinion and I have tried to keep it out.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Oral semaglutide is a peptide co-formulated with an absorption enhancer and carries food and water timing requirements. A small molecule does not have that constraint, which is the practical distinction.
small molecule, not a peptide, and that changes everything about it
Same view. The analytical problem is different enough that the usual purity discussions here do not transfer cleanly.
Went looking for independent testing on this and found essentially nothing, which was clarifying.
Spent an evening reading about small-molecule agonism at a peptide receptor. Genuinely interesting engineering.
Spent an evening reading about small-molecule agonism at a peptide receptor.
Adding the standing caveat — unapproved, and research material is not for human use.
Spent an evening reading about small-molecule agonism at a peptide receptor.
cato_batista is right that milligram comparisons across classes tell you nothing.
Corrected a cross-class dose comparison in the title. The body is untouched.
This. The absence of food and water timing restrictions is the practical difference people will actually notice.
Compared milligram figures across two completely different molecule classes in a comment. Deserved the correction.
[removed by moderator]
nothing containing this is approved anywhere yet
a non-peptide agonist does not degrade the way a peptide does
It is a non-peptide small-molecule agonist at the GLP-1 receptor. That is a substantial medicinal chemistry achievement: getting a small molecule to activate a receptor evolved for a peptide ligand.
do not assume reconstitution intuitions apply, there is nothing to reconstitute
Because it is not a peptide, it is not subject to the same degradation pathways, does not require the absorption enhancers used for oral peptides, and can be formulated as a conventional tablet.
Assumed the peptide purity conversations transferred and they do not. Different analytical problem entirely.
The no-timing-restriction thing is the part I would care about most in practice, and it barely gets mentioned here.
Agreed that phase 3 is where the comparison becomes fair. Everything before it is inference.
Milligram-for-milligram comparison with an injectable peptide is not meaningful and I should not have made it.
I would not assume the tolerability profile transfers exactly. Similar class effects, different exposure profile.
- 1Same view. The analytical problem is different enough that the usual purity…6 comments in this branch · started by u/yara_boateng