DebRD_ATL said:HbA1c reflects roughly three months of average glycaemia weighted toward the most recent weeks, which is why repeating it at six weeks tells you very…
All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.
Dr.PulmRoch said:Steady state is the thing most people miss.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
DebRD_ATL said:HbA1c reflects roughly three months of average glycaemia weighted toward the most recent weeks, which is why repeating it at six weeks tells you very…
I read this differently from DebRD_ATL, on substance rather than tone. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Because it is glucose-dependent, this class carries a low intrinsic hypoglycaemia risk on its own — the risk arrives when it is combined with insulin or a sulfonylurea, which usually need reducing.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. No action needed from anybody.