These meds suppress appetite via effects in the brain, and this is thought to be their primary mechanism of action. The quote you posted is incomplete and outdated.
Thanks for your report. After careful consideration over the past months I think I’m ready to try tirzepatide aswell.
Everything you wanted to know about glucagon from one of the top research scientists in this field.
Glucagon antagonist vs agonist (1).pdf (5.8 MB)
Just found that file I wanted to share about glucagon agonism in retatrutide. Really interesting.
I just happened to be re-reading the abstract from the GLP-1/sinoatrial node study, and noticed this quote: “neither cervical vagotomy, adrenergic blockers (alpha, beta, or combined alpha-beta blockade), ganglionic blockade (hexamethonium), nor inhibition of hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channels (ivabradine) abolished the marked chronotropic effect of GLP-1”
Ugh, I hope it wasn’t my idea about the ivabradine. Looks like diltiazem may be the only real hope here.
I also came across this study in dogs, where glucagon also increased heart rate and also wasn’t affected by beta-blockers but was prevented by verapamil:
Looks like non-dihydropyridine CCBs for the win (hopefully!)
That’s a bummer about the Ivabradine. Even AI apps said it could work.
Verapamil could be worth a try. I need to scour the internet to see if there are any anecdotes about this.
I think per what Dr Fraser said earlier in the thread, diltiazem is likely the better choice over verapamil.
Don’t use AI for medical decisions. For now LLMs are quite bad. (They’re good for diagnosis though, but that’s easier than treating…)
I wonder what AI would have said about Mediator (benfluorex) before it was withdrawn😜! AI only repeats what information is out there, and poor with synthesizing new insights.
It’s getting better though. o3 results in ARC AGI and Frontier Maths are very exciting. I can’t wait to try it! (hopefully next month?)
Update on this: small life extension in C. Elegans => Calcium channel blockers reduce aging rate (ARDD video) - #2 by adssx
Well yes I wasn’t suggesting using AI to make medical decisions, but I think we all can agree they’ve proven to be very useful in this field.
That’s where I disagree: for now they’re mostly useless and dangerous. Unfortunately. I pay for ChatGPT pro and Perplexity Pro and spend a lot of time testing them on medical questions: it’s bad. The average regular user here is smarter.
Do they provide references at the end of their answers? Dr. Oracle does, and they’ve always checked out (in agreement with the answer), at least so far for the questions I’ve asked (which admittedly are fairly straightforward questions).
There are some medical AI-specific sites that I would trust over my primary provider.
I have had several primary providers over the years, and I can’t say any of them were current on the latest studies or treatments. I would undoubtedly use AI as a second opinion. The insurance system constrains my primary providers, and AI doesn’t.
Two, I would suggest that you look at: One is a very reasonably paid subscription, and the other is free. They are both better than paid ChatGPT Pro (Which I pay for but do not use for medical advice)
Both of these sites provide references for everything they claim. They never give phony references. You can read the response and references and make your own decision.
Liner AI also provides references in their responses, although I have seen them answer things a certain way and the accompanying links don’t completely back up what the AI says, so I have to verify the sources they include to make sure.
Which one of these is the free one?
I think AI is a good starting point. ChatGPT will give you references if you ask, so you can verify the response or continue your research.
I’ve had the exact opposite experience using AI, albeit one I’ve modified for my own medical purposes (prompts, etc.) but I challenge my PCP periodically using it and even she’s not infallible
I’ve taken many actionable steps using AI. I still think the average human would still choose to see an actual doctor versus AI and that’s proven by the sheer number of unnecessary ER visits in the U.S.