help me understand glucagon, I have read the wiki twice
help me understand glucagon, I have read the wiki twice. Searched first, found three threads that contradict each other, hence the post. Went up slowly, deliberately, because everything on this board says the escalation is where trouble lives. Uneventful so far and I am not going to pretend that is a finding. Phase 2…
Yes — the comparison threads are apples to oranges and they generate more heat than anything else here.
wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings
the phase 2 numbers were striking and they were also 48 weeks in a small population
The standing caveat, written out properly because it keeps getting compressed into a footnote.
Nothing containing this compound is approved by any regulator. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use. That is not a legal formality on this board — it is why there is so little independent data, why the escalation schedules people post are invented, and why nobody here can answer a dosing question.
What this board can usefully do is read the published trials carefully, log independent purity results, and be honest about how thin the evidence base is. Everything else belongs somewhere with a clinician in it.
Sent a vial to Janoshik out of curiosity. Result was 99.4% against a claimed 99.0%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
Are you comparing against phase 3 numbers for something else? They are not comparable.
Glucagon receptor agonism is associated with increased energy expenditure and with hepatic effects. That is a mechanistic story with strong preclinical support and limited phase 2 human data.