Why people actually stop, in the order they actually stop
Real-world persistence figures, with their definitions stated, because the definitions are doing most of the work.
Patient experience
Page 2 of 8 of this archive, newest first.
The supply gap as a clinical event
Cost is the modal reason for discontinuation in every dataset we have seen, and it is absent from the clinical literature.
The one randomised trial that combined an incretin with supervised exercise
Mass and function are different endpoints and training affects them differently. Most coverage treats them as one.
The one randomised trial that combined an incretin with supervised exercise
The older-adult diet-and-exercise trials are the closest analogue to rapid pharmacological weight loss, and they are twenty years old.
What happens when the drug is taken away: three randomised answers
What was withdrawn, from whom, after how long, and what was measured afterwards.
How much of exenatide weight loss can any instrument actually attribute?
A body-composition report gives four decimal places and no confidence interval. That is the whole difficulty in one sentence.
Why people actually stop, in the order they actually stop
Why the reason for stopping changes what happens afterwards.
Why the bone question is harder than the muscle question
A plausible mechanism, a measurable change, and no outcome data. This is what an open question looks like.
Maintenance dosing: what is licensed, what is practised, and what is evidenced
Every withdrawal trial compared full dose against nothing. The clinically interesting comparison — full dose against a reduced one — has not been randomised.
The dose that got you here and the dose that keeps you here
What the labels permit, what clinicians do, and the size of the gap between them.
Why "muscle-sparing" is a marketing term and not a measurement
Grading six widely repeated claims against the studies actually behind them.
Load, not cardio: the distinction the general advice keeps losing
Mass and function are different endpoints and training affects them differently. Most coverage treats them as one.
Why people actually stop, in the order they actually stop
A supply interruption is a discontinuation with no notice, no taper and no plan. That is a distinct clinical situation.
Maintenance dosing: what is licensed, what is practised, and what is evidenced
Every withdrawal trial compared full dose against nothing. The clinically interesting comparison — full dose against a reduced one — has not been randomised.
What the older diet-and-exercise trials found in the hip
The evidence base is one secondary analysis, several small studies and a large amount of extrapolation from bariatric surgery.
Two sessions a week, and the evidence behind the prescription
Mass and function are different endpoints and training affects them differently. Most coverage treats them as one.
Randomised withdrawal is the cleanest design in this field and the least discussed
The evidence on stopping is better than the evidence on almost anything else in this field, because somebody deliberately randomised it.
A year after stopping: what the trials found at the far end
The variance around the mean regain trajectory is large and unexplained, exactly as it is for the weight loss.
Eating enough protein on a suppressed appetite is an arithmetic problem before it is a nutritional one
The resistance-training and energy-deficit literature supports a higher protein intake. None of it was conducted in people taking an incretin.
The lowest effective dose is a real concept with almost no data behind it
Dose reduction is not withdrawal, and the trials that tested withdrawal cannot be read as testing it.