GIP receptor pharmacology — anyone have experience?

One thing that is still open after JenPlateau’s answer:

What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?

anders_CPH said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

I read this differently from anders_CPH, on substance rather than tone. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.

Worth separating that from the pharmacology, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

anders_CPH said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.

anders_CPH said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.