Dr.SurgeonPGH said:The dose-response is real but shallow at the top.
That holds for the injectable. The oral formulation has different absorption behaviour and the dose numbers are not interchangeable, which is worth saying out loud because people quote them as if they were.
Dr.PeteFamMed said:The absorption variability is real, but it partly averages out over weeks — the steady-state trough is less erratic than any single day would suggest.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Taking it to my next appointment.
Dr.SurgeonPGH said:The dose-response is real but shallow at the top.
Pushing back on Dr.SurgeonPGH here. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. No action needed from anybody.