sarah_TO said:

BenResearch_OR said: ...cardiovascular risk is just another fad...

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

I want to bring up the cardiovascular angle on cardiovascular risk.

The SELECT trial demonstrated a 20% reduction in MACE with semaglutide 2.4mg[1]. This is practice-changing because the CV benefit appears to be independent of the degree of weight loss — suggesting direct vascular and anti-inflammatory mechanisms.

For cardiovascular risk, this means we need to think beyond the primary outcome and consider the cardiovascular implications. The all-cause mortality reduction (HR 0.81) is the most clinically meaningful signal.

PeptideChemSF said:

Vitamin deficiency cascade with cardiovascular risk: after 6+ months of reduced food intake, I developed a subtle but important pattern: low B12 →…

Cardiac biomarkers and cardiovascular risk: my cardiologist ordered advanced cardiac labs given my family history. Results were encouraging:

• NT-proBNP: 56 pg/mL (normal, cardiac function preserved)
• Lp(a): 26 nmol/L (genetic, unchanged — expected)
• ApoB: dropped from 151 to 96 mg/dL (excellent response)
• Coronary calcium score: 0 (unchanged from baseline — reassuring)

The ApoB reduction is particularly meaningful — it's considered the best single predictor of cardiovascular risk. GLP-1 therapy seems to improve this consistently.

Dr.RaviCardio said:

SELECT is the trial that changed the framing of this class, because it was an outcome trial rather than a weight trial: about a 20% relative reduction…

NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).

From SELECT trial: MACE at 39 months — 6.5% semaglutide vs 8.0% placebo. ARR = 1.5%. NNT = 67 over 3.3 years.

Compare to established therapies:

These NNTs are clinically meaningful and comparable to accepted cardiovascular interventions.

Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.