gburdell
Member
If tirz or sema work well for you, then definitely don't mess with success.In general, I prefer to minimize risk by not being an early adopter. By the time I used Sema (or Tirz), millions of "Patient years" of clinical experience had been established by their initial use for diabetes, and of course that was built on a 30 year history of earlier short acting GLPs.
Personally, while I respect adventurousness into new compounds (I worked my way through TIHKAL and PIHKAL decades ago if you know what those are), the question I'd be asking myself is "What are you trying to gain that offsets the additional risk, however small, of drugs we have significantly less experience with?"
So far all I've seen is possibly low single digit greater max weight loss potential, which I don't need. Slightly faster liver fat clearance which I don't need. So in my mind it's all additional risk, higher cost, and no benefit.
Again I think a lot of this may stem from thinking of these compounds like diet pills, and the "new ones" are "more effective" so I should use those.
Also, the primary driver in most of these is not to be "better", but to give each company a unique formulation they can patent and market in order to compete with Tirz.
But reta's "low single digit greater max weight loss" ends up being a what, 20-30% difference between it and tirz?
What I've noticed is that it doesn't have nearly the appetite suppression that tirz did, but it definitely does (for me) cause visceral fat loss and much greater vascularity.
