Tesamorelin is a licensed medicine and gets confused with things that are not

Started 20 November 2024 · 24 replies · 310 hearts · read 6.2k times

FlossieShrewsbury, UK · 20 November 2024

1.7 years ago

A question rather than an update: Tesamorelin is a licensed medicine and gets confused with things that are not

Evidence question. I would rather have an honest "we do not know" than a confident answer.

I am asking because two people I trust have told me opposite things and both of them cited the same study.

Putting this here because I do not want to be sold anything. I want to know what is actually established and where the evidence runs out.

What I want is the methods rather than the conclusions, because I have been burned by a conclusion that the methods did not support.

Thanks. I would genuinely rather be told nobody knows than be given a confident answer.

103

FabianBasel, CH

What helped me was reading one full paper rather than twenty summaries, because the summaries had all lost the same caveats.

17me too 6

SunilFacilitatorBirmingham, UK

Speaking as a facilitator: we do not name individuals in this circle and we do not accuse anybody of anything. We describe what a document does and does not show.

AbramAmsterdam, NL

Gently disagreeing with Sunil, or rather adding the other half of it.

What I would say to a newcomer is that saying you do not know is welcome here and is not treated as ignorance.

IdrisCardiff, UK

What I would flag is that the safety data is the part that is thinnest, and it is the part that matters most.

TacitaRome, IT

Something that helped was somebody here distinguishing between compounds with a real clinical programme and compounds without one.

WellsChester, UK

Coming back to what Idris wrote further up, because it is the bit I keep thinking about.

My honest experience is that the more I read here, the more conservative I have become about the whole category.

MableBolton, UK

I would say if you cannot find a published human study, that is itself the finding rather than a gap to fill with reasoning.

BunnyWeston-super-Mare, UK

The dosing discussion in most places online is derived from animal work by arithmetic, and that arithmetic does not do what people think it does.

11me too 1

PolaGdańsk, PL

My approach now is to ask what would have to be true for a claim to hold, and then to look for whether anybody has checked.

TobinCork, IE

#10

Bunny said something I want to sit with for a second.

What surprised me was how much of what circulates traces back to a single small study repeated in a hundred summaries.

IvorLlanelli, UK

#11

The honest answer to most questions in this circle is that nobody has run the study that would answer them.

TamarPlymouth, UK

#12

I would say be very careful with anything where the entire published record is animal work. That is a starting point, not a finding.

NevGrimsby, UK

#13

Tamar has already said most of this and I want to add the one part that was different for me.

What I keep coming back to is that a compound having a plausible mechanism and a compound having human outcome data are very different situations.

FlossieShrewsbury, UK

#14

Everything discussed here is research-use-only material. That is not a formality: it was never manufactured, released or documented for use in a person.

FabianBasel, CH

#15

No wisdom, just: I am sorry. That sounds genuinely hard.

MorayElgin, UK

#16

The reading group format works well for this. We took one compound, found everything published, and concluded it was thinner than the discussion suggested.

AbramAmsterdam, NL

#17

Something I have noticed is that the confidence of the discussion is usually inversely proportional to the amount of evidence.

13me too 6

IdrisCardiff, UK

#18

Abram — yes, and the bit that took me longest to accept was the next part.

What helped me was asking, for each compound, what the best single piece of human evidence actually is. Often the answer is very little.

TacitaRome, IT

#19

Idris, thank you for that. It gives me somewhere to start from.

Nothing in this circle is medical advice and none of us is in a position to tell you what is safe for you.

WellsChester, UK

#20

Something practical: I keep a note of what I have actually read on each of these, because otherwise I mistake familiarity for knowledge.

MableBolton, UK

#21

Reading Idris, I recognised more of that than I expected to.

The most valuable thread in this circle was one where three people said clearly that they had stopped taking something and why.

BunnyWeston-super-Mare, UK

#22

I found the discussion here refreshingly free of certainty, which is not true of anywhere else I have looked.

SunilFacilitatorBirmingham, UK

#23

I am adding this thread to the circle's resources. The distinction between what a mechanism suggests and what an outcome shows is the one this circle exists to keep, and it is worth having written down somewhere findable.

TobinCork, IE

#24

Something I got wrong was assuming that because something is discussed everywhere it must have a body of evidence behind it.