sorry tubby, I misread. I do believe safety is high, though. Rare side effects can happen. With any medicine.tubby said:
We Still Don’t Know Much About Grey GLP Use or long-term outcomes of GLP use
- Thread starter Nmcoyote1
- Start date
- Status
Do you happen to know if incidence of NAION is dose-dependent? I know that there are other risk factors like sleep apnea, hypertension, etc. Just wondering if dosage is indicative.miss-sanne said:
No it's not. Not to my knowledge. Any low dose can do it.Zydeceltico said:
We do talk a lot about it here in Denmark, because yes Novo is our economy-baby.
It's rare 1:10.000
It's based on observation.
I was very sorry for my friend, only 9 patients in Denmark has been diagnosed, so he was very unlucky !
He was on a low dose, 0,25-0,5 mg.
miss-sanne said:
First I'd heard of NAION in general, much less in reference to GLP1. I assume it affected him bilaterally?
Yes both eyes for him.woundcarping said:
Novo put in on their list of side effects last year, and it was recognized as a very rare side effect in October 2025, I think.
We started to hear about it in Denmark last spring, when patients talked about it. So I got my eyes checked out with eye doctor, when I started using Tirz.
We seem to be arguing past each other for some reason that I don't understand.Zydeceltico said:
You're referring to short-term safety concerns. I (and numerous studies) agree with you that these drugs seem to be fairly safe in the short-term, aside from rare side effects like @miss-sanne has brought up.
What OP asked about was LONG-TERM safety. We have no information on long-term safety other than the studies and post-marketing data in diabetic populations, which has the limitations I explained above.
I want these drugs to be safe long-term just as much as anyone else here, but that desire doesn't justifying lying. They're probably safe long-term. And even if it turns out there's an issue that emerges after a decade of use, there's a good chance that thing is less dangerous than a decade of being morbidly obese. That's the gamble we're all making and I think it's a good gamble, but it's important to be clear about that. If some 20-year old wants to take GLPs to lose 15 pounds to look better in a bikini, that's a different kind of gamble where if we're lying about what is known and what isn't known, it could cause them to make a decision they might not have.
Yep agree. I had no idea my gallbladder was activelyJoonyO said:Had I known that mine was f'd up BECAUSE of my diet I would have TRIED to make changes and tried to save it. I was fed so much misinformation...I had ten more attacks before relenting to surgery after the initial attack. I couldn't take the idea of going through another couple hours ( at least ) of that kind of pain.
On the other hand I rather enjoy messing with people now and saying, " I'm part human. Not 100%."
I look for something "positive" in everything. lol
I agree, im in my 50s and was over 330 pounds, couldnt tie my shoes and barely wipe.my own ass. Im way more willing to put my future health potentially on the line in exchange for less chance of a heart attack, stroke or diabetes.tubby said:
But some kid teying to lose a few pounds to cut weight. Not ok. Wish they wouldnt risk it
They compare the pain to that of child birth...so after birthing 10 chillenses I couldn't stand the thought of doing it again!BH_LOVER said:
The thing that really stands out to me from the research is convincing and repeatable evidence that semaglutide and tirzepatide reduce overall death rates. The younger and healthier the population involved in the studies the harder it will be to see this signal, and it requires lots of patients over a long time. The longest term studies show reduced chances of heart attack, stroke and death, by around 25 to 30%. They reduce the chances of a lot of other things, the development of diabetes in those with impaired glucose tolerance is reduced by about 90%. The results on cancers is more complex but there is pretty good evidence of reduced chances of developing many of the most common cancers. For Alzheimer's the evidence so far is mixed, population studies show significantly reduced risks, but prospective trials ( which are more accurate ) so far have not shown any benefit. They improve quality of life, mobility and arthritis mainly due to weight loss. This post would be pages long if I tried to include them all. The number of studies being published on these sort of related consequences is enormous ( many hundreds to a 1000 per year in 2025 ), and over the next few years the picture will slowly get clearer.
Shorter term negative effects are very common and cause a fairly high percentage of people to stop taking them, mainly nausea and vomiting diarrhoea and constipation, as well as skin sensory symptoms. Most of these type side effects peak at months 2 to 4 after starting and then improve, but not for everyone. Most of these effects are not severe, but some people develop dehydration and subsequent renal failure from gi side effects, and some die, most at risk are older physically and medically frail persons and diabetics with multimorbidity.
Are there negative effects in the long term - yes Gallstones are a consequence of any type of weight loss, sudden improvements in diabetic control can cause neuropathy, pancreatitis, nerve compression syndromes due to weight loss, NAION, plus many more, but I think the important issue is that the sum of all of the negative long term consequences is quite small, and the sum of the positive ones is very large, in terms of order of magnitude effects positive effects outweigh negative ones by more than 10 to 1. The fact that overall chances of death go down, essentially means that there are no hidden or unknown negative effects that increase your chances of death. A lot of the studies I have seen that emphasise the long term negative effects or concern about unknown long term effects, as far as I am concerned seem to be mostly ignoring the large amount of evidence that already exists, and mostly seem to be coming from areas of medicine where their whole job is questioned by glp's mainly dietitians ( whose treatments for obesity do not work over the long term as far as I am concerned ) and weight loss surgeons ( whose treatments do work and very well, but are expensive, have limited access, have significant adverse effects, and whose treatment method is being questioned by increasingly effective glp medications )
TLDR These medicines make you significantly less likely to die while taking them, this alone massively outweighs any long term known or unknown harms.
Shorter term negative effects are very common and cause a fairly high percentage of people to stop taking them, mainly nausea and vomiting diarrhoea and constipation, as well as skin sensory symptoms. Most of these type side effects peak at months 2 to 4 after starting and then improve, but not for everyone. Most of these effects are not severe, but some people develop dehydration and subsequent renal failure from gi side effects, and some die, most at risk are older physically and medically frail persons and diabetics with multimorbidity.
Are there negative effects in the long term - yes Gallstones are a consequence of any type of weight loss, sudden improvements in diabetic control can cause neuropathy, pancreatitis, nerve compression syndromes due to weight loss, NAION, plus many more, but I think the important issue is that the sum of all of the negative long term consequences is quite small, and the sum of the positive ones is very large, in terms of order of magnitude effects positive effects outweigh negative ones by more than 10 to 1. The fact that overall chances of death go down, essentially means that there are no hidden or unknown negative effects that increase your chances of death. A lot of the studies I have seen that emphasise the long term negative effects or concern about unknown long term effects, as far as I am concerned seem to be mostly ignoring the large amount of evidence that already exists, and mostly seem to be coming from areas of medicine where their whole job is questioned by glp's mainly dietitians ( whose treatments for obesity do not work over the long term as far as I am concerned ) and weight loss surgeons ( whose treatments do work and very well, but are expensive, have limited access, have significant adverse effects, and whose treatment method is being questioned by increasingly effective glp medications )
TLDR These medicines make you significantly less likely to die while taking them, this alone massively outweighs any long term known or unknown harms.
That's all good stuff, but you're leaving out one key detail in your analysis. GLPs reduce death (not to mention all the other factors you brought up) relative to poorly controlled diabetes . So if someone has poorly controlled diabetes then your analysis is absolutely correct, since that is what we currently have long-term data on. If someone doesn't have diabetes, it's quite possible GLPs will be found to reduce death, but that's still speculative at this point.lessthanhalf said:
A similar logical error was made a few years back when it was announced that diabetics on metformin monotherapy lived longer on average than the general population. This was a correct observation, but people erroneously took it to mean that metformin more generally had life-extension properties. When metformin use in non-diabetics was studied, it was found that it didn't appear to lead to life-extension in non-diabetics.
Now, I'll grant you that one key difference with GLP1s is that they also serve to reduce other intermediate markers (e.g. inflammation, lipids, BMI, etc.) in non-diabetics, which supports the idea that they'll be beneficial in non-diabetics. I want it to be true just as much as you do, but unfortunately our desires are not a replacement for long-term data in non-diabetics.
A guy over at meso talks about immunogenissis and aggregates often. Or at least he did.Nmcoyote1 said:
IMO most obesity surgeons/physicians will do what's in their OWN interest. Unless they want to find another occupation. GLPs negate their necessity as "cures" for being overweight. You don't need a gastric sleeve ( and the possibility of death under anesthesia ) when you have GLPs as a proven alternative to allowing yourself to be opened up like a chicken and have parts removed or altered.
In other words I believe fear mongering will be used the same way BP is doing with CN grey.
But hey, what do I know? Just speculative on my part.
In other words I believe fear mongering will be used the same way BP is doing with CN grey.
But hey, what do I know? Just speculative on my part.
I'll take that another step and liken it to plumbing. If you spend time in plumbing forums you'll see professional plumbers ridicule PEX and Sharkbite style connectors as a "$20000 insurance incident waiting to happen" even though the fittings are proven, in building code, etc.....JoonyO said:
Why? Any home owner can go spend $150 on the tools for PEX and easily replumb their own home. Check it with the go/no-go gauge and you are good to go. A single faucet or valve? 5 minutes of work for a C grade level home DIY person. That cuts into a LOT of work for real plumbers.
I once had an emergency when I was leaving town. I had my spouse call a plumber to replace a valve that was broken. I let them know on the phone it was a copper line and I wanted it replaced with a copper fitting and sweated in. They did the work, charged $350 for it. When I got home I saw they cut the copper and used a $25 Sharkbite slip fitting. We had words about that one.
Soooooo when a homeowner does it to save money it's a big no no waiting to blow. When they do it to shave time of the job it's perfectly good work.
I think we are seeing that same mentality here. Heck my doc just gave me an Rx with no real guidance. It wasn't till I found grey that I saw great guides on proper diet and advice on how to handle GI issues!
Wow! This is staggering! Thanks for sharing!Zydeceltico said:
- Status
