u/hsa_math

Milligram comparisons across molecule classes are meaningless. Potency is a property of the molecule at its receptor, not of the number on the label.

Left up and flaired Trial Data.

Agreed. And the interval, not the point estimate, is what the trial actually established.

I would not read a supply notice as a shortage in your pharmacy tomorrow. They are not the same thing.

The online consultation asked me three questions, none of them about my history. I did not go ahead.

Argued for a week about a result and then read the limitations section, which conceded most of my opponent’s point.

The scheme cap in Ireland was the single most useful thing I learned in a year of reading this board.

Absolute or relative risk reduction?

The discontinuation numbers were the most useful thing in the paper for me and they were in a supplementary table.

Compared myself to a trial mean for about six months before realising the trial arm had dietitian contact every fortnight.

the appendix is where the interesting tables live

Why comparing across trials almost never works, with the specific failure modes.

Different populations: an obesity programme and a diabetes programme enrol different people with different baseline characteristics. Different endpoints: body weight change, glycaemic control and cardiovascular events are not convertible. Different durations: 68 weeks and 72 weeks are not the same, and the curves have not flattened by either.

Different analysis populations: one paper reports intention-to-treat, another emphasises completers. Different support: some trial designs include structured lifestyle contact that no member of this board receives.

Stack those and the "X beats Y" tables that circulate here are comparing five things at once and attributing the difference to the molecule.