Dr.PulmRoch said:DEXA scan update relevant to lean mass: Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12.
Sharing my comprehensive lab data relevant to lean mass:
| Biomarker | Baseline | Month 3 | Month 6 | Month 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (lbs) | 269 | 264 | 239 | 219 |
| A1C (%) | 7.9 | 6.9 | 5.8 | 5.6 |
| hsCRP (mg/L) | 9.0 | 5.0 | 2.5 | 1.5 |
| Triglycerides | 249 | 189 | 129 | 119 |
Protocol: Tirzepatide 10mg/wk, resistance training 5x/week, protein 1.5g/kg/day.
The improvements in lean mass are clearly reflected in these numbers. The inflammatory marker reduction (hsCRP) is particularly striking.
Dr.PulmRoch said:DEXA scan update relevant to lean mass: Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12.
Regarding lean mass: I accidentally injected my dose intramuscularly instead of subcutaneously last week (went in at wrong angle, too deep). Called my pharmacist — they said it's not dangerous but may absorb faster, potentially causing more GI effects.
Sure enough, had worse nausea that day. Lesson learned: pinch the skin properly and use the right needle length for your body composition.
Dr.PulmRoch said:DEXA scan update relevant to lean mass: Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
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 BiochemClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Dr.ObesityLA said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Second this. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.