Direct evidence is thin. The claim is plausible and aligns with adjacent findings, but there isn't yet a body of high-quality work that would let us call it well-supported on its own terms.
So it begs the ultimate question, which is like, what's the total use case for this going to be? Is this going to be a drug you cycle on and off? Or is it going to be a drug that a person has to stay on indefinitely, and if so, will they become tachyphylactic? Will they gain resistance to it?
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I fear many people are not aware of this with GLP-1s. Will be interesting to see what happens over time to people who come off... i hope it's not too bad.
um so there is some safety issue some open questions no one's taken it for 40 years so we don't know what happens if you take it for 40 years
I don't just mean the probability that you get this I mean the fact that we don't know what happens if you take it for 40 years um so there is some safety issue some open questions no one's taking it for 40 years so we don't know what happens if you take it for 40 years