🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCardiovascular OutcomesHas anyone dealt with select trial: 20% mace reduction? Page 4

Has anyone dealt with select trial: 20% mace reduction?

Dr.SurgeonPGH Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 6:00 AM 28 replies 808 viewsPage 4 of 6
lisa_labSD
Member
278
1,234
Oct 2024
San Diego, CA
May 5, 2026 at 1:19 AM#16

From the other side of the consultation, briefly.

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

I understand the skepticism — we've all seen "miracle" weight loss solutions come and go. But consider what makes GLP-1 agonists different:

  • Phase 3 RCTs with thousands of participants (not 20-person pilot studies)
  • Published in NEJM, JAMA, Lancet (not press releases)
  • Replicated across multiple independent research groups
  • Proven cardiovascular and renal benefits beyond weight loss
  • Biological mechanism fully characterized at the receptor level

This isn't a fad — it's a new drug class supported by the highest level of clinical evidence. The comparison to past fads is understandable but inappropriate.

13 13stefan_berlin, Dr.EM_Chicago, pete_RVA and 10 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
fiona_glasgow
Member
312
1,345
Aug 2024
Glasgow, UK
May 5, 2026 at 5:51 AM#17

Following on from CryptoCarl — and this may be the naive question:

Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?

12 12TirzTom, TrialTracker_MD, JennaRN and 9 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
PharmHunterJen
Member
567
2,345
Jul 2024
Illinois
May 5, 2026 at 10:23 AM#18
lisa_labSD said:
CryptoCarl said: ...cardiovascular risk is just another fad...

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:

InterventionNNTTimeframe
Semaglutide (MACE)673.3 years
Statins primary prevention (MI)~1005 years
Aspirin secondary prevention~772 years

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

11 11kevin_tulsa, Dr.PainCLE, mike_mealprep and 8 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

PeptideMeter — Independent Peptide Analytics

Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.

View Results
SteveThurs
Member
523
2,345
Sep 2024
Wisconsin
Online
May 5, 2026 at 2:55 PM#19
lisa_labSD said:
CryptoCarl said: ...cardiovascular risk is just another fad...

I'm 55 years old and want to share my perspective on cardiovascular risk as an older member of this community.

My doctor was initially hesitant because of my age, but the SELECT trial included patients up to 72 and showed consistent benefit across age groups. We started at the lowest dose with closer monitoring.

13 months later: down 40 lbs, off atorvastatin, A1C from 8.0% to 5.3%. My cardiologist is thrilled. cardiovascular risk is absolutely relevant for older adults — don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

10 10DoseLogDan, SleepFixSam, PurityPaulOR and 7 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
mike_mod
Moderator
7,234
19,823
Nov 2023
New York
Online
May 5, 2026 at 7:27 PM#20

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Carry on.

Last edited: May 5, 2026 at 9:27 PM
38 13PurityPaulOR, MaxMetOK, MounjBrad and 35 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

SELECT trial: 20% MACE reduction — mechanistic deep dive7 replies
Semaglutide cardiovascular benefit independent of weight loss11 replies
STEP-HFpEF: semaglutide in heart failure with preserved EF15 replies
GLP-1 and arterial inflammation — hsCRP and IL-6 reduction data18 replies
Lp(a) on GLP-1 agonists — any impact on this risk factor?8 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register