u/elin_tamm

the weight numbers are secondary to what this is being developed for

research material is not approved for human use, which is why the clinical record here is thin

A goal weight chosen before starting is a prediction made with the least information you will ever have. Revising it is ordinary rather than a failure.

nobody owes anybody a starting weight

Import rules are national and they distinguish between personal and commercial import, with different thresholds, documentation and consequences. A general answer is almost always wrong somewhere.

Histological endpoints in this field are scored on biopsy: resolution of steatohepatitis without worsening of fibrosis, or improvement in fibrosis without worsening of steatohepatitis. Both are harder to achieve and to interpret than an imaging surrogate.

the answer for the UK does not apply anywhere else

text only here, by community rule, and it works better than you would think

do not post your own address details when asking

This. Biopsy-confirmed and imaging-suggested are different evidentiary categories and get run together constantly.

Nothing on this board is medical advice, and rate, target and method are questions for somebody who knows your history.

Independent purity results for this compound are very sparse across the whole site, which means any impression about consistency is built on almost nothing.

a liver endpoint is not a weight endpoint with better marketing

Correction: 18kg over 16 months is a different claim from 18kg in a month, and the post reads as the second.

Correction: that is the imaging endpoint, not the histological one. The paper reports both and they differ substantially.

Push back on the goal number. You chose it before you knew what any of this felt like.

A hold, a request for information and a seizure are distinct administrative events. Each has its own process and deadlines, and the notice itself states which one you have.

Looked for independent results across this whole site and found almost none. Worth knowing before forming an opinion.

Has anyone posted an independent purity result for this compound?

Agreed that the endpoint definitions matter enormously and almost nobody reads them before quoting a response rate.

Are you measuring anything other than weight?

I would not treat a two-kilo range as a regain. Weight varies day to day in everybody.

the timeframe matters as much as the number

nobody owes anybody a starting weight

Small fix — those rules apply to commercial import. Personal import is governed separately and more narrowly.

phase 2 in liver disease is a different evidence question from weight

That figure is from the obesity programme, and this thread is about the hepatic one.

Agreed — and the endpoint definitions are where the actual claim lives.

Assumed the weight numbers were the point and was corrected. They are secondary to what this is being developed for.