My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
Relative versus absolute is the distinction that gets lost: a 20% relative reduction on a high baseline risk is a large absolute benefit, and the same relative figure on a low baseline risk is a small one.
What I am trying to establish is how much of the SELECT benefit is plausibly independent of the weight loss, and whether that distinction changes anything practical.
Tell me what I have not thought of.
DanielChem_CHI said:My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
I want to bring up the cardiovascular angle on cardiovascular risk.
The SELECT trial demonstrated a 20% reduction in MACE with semaglutide 2.4mg[1]. This is practice-changing because the CV benefit appears to be independent of the degree of weight loss — suggesting direct vascular and anti-inflammatory mechanisms.
For cardiovascular risk, this means we need to think beyond the primary outcome and consider the cardiovascular implications. The all-cause mortality reduction (HR 0.81) is the most clinically meaningful signal.
[1] Lincoff AM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(24):2221-2232.
julia.endo said:I want to bring up the cardiovascular angle on cardiovascular risk.
Dizziness and cardiovascular risk: I was lightheaded for the first 3 weeks. Root cause was a combination of reduced caloric intake and mild dehydration.
Fix: minimum 80-100oz water daily, don't skip meals even if you're not hungry (eat small protein-rich snacks), and stand up slowly from sitting/lying positions. Also check your blood pressure — GLP-1-induced weight loss can make BP meds too strong, requiring dose reduction.
Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesGL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer
Est. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemDanielChem_CHI said:My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.
Vitamin deficiency cascade with cardiovascular risk: after 6+ months of reduced food intake, I developed a subtle but important pattern: low B12 → elevated homocysteine → increased cardiovascular risk marker.
The connection: B12 is a cofactor for homocysteine metabolism. Without adequate B12, homocysteine accumulates. This is ironic — taking a CV-protective medication while developing a CV risk factor from reduced nutrition.
Solution: comprehensive vitamin supplementation and regular lab monitoring. Don't let the medication's benefits be undermined by nutritional deficiencies.