faloppi said:
Airborne Daddy said:
So for roughly 18 months I've cycled through all of the big 3, and/or stacked glp1's together. During the first 4 months I dropped about 22lbs, and after that nothing. The scale won't budge. I figured my nightly 1500 calories of alcohol were to blame. So I stopped drinking for more than a month (well, 5 beers spread across 35 days) and only lost one more pound. I bumped the gym up to 5x a week and began walking with my dog wearing a 30lb pack, a mile here and a mile there, still no movement on the scale.
From day one I've been a slow responder, and now I'm pretty sure it's the pam gene or something wrong with my thyroid.... started at 249, currently 226. I take 9mg reta/6, and sometimes 9mg tirz every 6 days. The good news? I began with stage 2, borderline stage 3 fatty liver plus liver fibrosis F2 (F4 means cirrhosis)....A1C was 6.3, glucose 114 and triglycerides 399. TODAY no fatty liver (3%) fat. Moved to stage F0-F1 fibrosis, A1C is 5.5, glucose 92 and triglycerides 158.... My point is even if you dont lose the 50lbs or 100lbs you wanted, dont write off the other benefits. Cutting my drinking 95% surely helped, but 35 days doesnt explain all the improvements. Continue Mission.
For me, no matter what the scale says, this is precisely why the evidence base — anecdotal accounts such as yours (appreciate you posting it!) along with every clinical trial, study and research effort so far (which, with glp1 and tirz, now stretches past 4+ years) — points to far too many upsides for long-term health (and, up to now, few downsides). Because of that, I can't picture a future where I fully stop taking at least one agent from the 2+ agonist families (glp/gip/glucagon/amylin). From the Select trial we learned glp1s cut cardiovascular events by 20% and bring down systemic inflammation substantially, while the glycemic/insulin advantages are already widely recognized. Tirz in the surpass study demonstrated comparable cardiac, inflammation and kidney advantages. With reta, the triumph studies have revealed what it can do for lipid profiles, the liver and visceral fat reduction. The Elora trials are demonstrating an ability to hold onto more muscle mass while still going after fat loss, bring triglycerides down, and leave heart rate untouched (rhr even drops). Research is now branching into areas we never would have predicted, such as lowering substance abuse. Honestly, it's astonishing that Big Pharma allowed these products to take off the way they did, since they stand to seriously erode their downstream revenue streams (healthier people don't need all the other drugs they make!). Their original greed may end up costing them (though they'll surely lobby politicians hard to shove the genie back into the bottle at some point — obviously, I'm hoping they fail spectacularly).
Bad cholesterol and cardiac problems run through my entire family (my LipoA is 226!), and I already accept that cholesterol medication is a lifelong necessity for me (nobody in my family or any doctor disputes this), so how is a low maintenance dose of my preferred metabolic tools, taken 1-2x per week, any different? It isn't. Yet society has recast this drug class as a "cheat button" for getting "skinny," while ignoring that these compounds may actually be the "fountain of youth" people have talked about, dreamed of and sung about for so long. Most of us probably take plenty of supplements, vitamins and other pep protocols, but I'd wager that if everything else were dropped and only tirz, or elora/tirz, or reta (put your own favorite in here), or some combination of those remained, it would deliver the biggest improvement to our long-term health and quality of life (setting aside lifestyle factors like diet, exercise, habits and vices).
That's where I stand based on what I know right now. Should new data shift the risk/reward picture, I'll rethink it. And if it turns out that using these long term is the same as chain-smoking packs of Marlboro Reds every day, then I suppose I'd have to change my tune
.
