Trying to separate three different claims about tesamorelin: that it is the right molecule, that it is the right dose, and that it does something useful.
My rule now: if a claim cannot survive being written down with the numbers attached, it is marketing.
Sample size, blinding, and who paid for it. Those three questions kill most of the confidence in most of these threads.
What the growth hormone secretagogue class does pharmacologically does not require the subjective effect to be large to be real.
Willing to accept that my own experience is the weakest evidence in the room.
Narrow conclusion.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation begin? That is the whole thread. Same for me with tesamorelin, unfortunately.
Most of what is called evidence here is one person, one vial, one month.
Most of the popular protocol is borrowed from a clinical population and applied to healthy people without comment.
Underdosing and tolerance are indistinguishable from the inside, and everyone picks the flattering explanation.
Is a baseline blood test really necessary before starting something like this?
Reconstitution arithmetic is only half the problem. The other half is what was in the vial.