My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
Relative versus absolute is the distinction that gets lost: a 20% relative reduction on a high baseline risk is a large absolute benefit, and the same relative figure on a low baseline risk is a small one.
The bit I cannot resolve on my own is how much of the SELECT benefit is plausibly independent of the weight loss, and whether that distinction changes anything practical.
I have searched first, so if this is covered somewhere point me at it and I will read it.
laura_annarbor said:My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
Senior perspective on cardiovascular risk: I'm 71 years old and started this journey skeptically. My geriatrician recommended it after years of failed interventions.
13 months later: down 49 lbs, more mobile, pain reduced, medications simplified. My quality of life has improved dramatically. I wish this existed 20 years ago.
To other older adults hesitating: the SELECT trial proved benefit in our age group. You deserve to feel good in your body regardless of age.
Dr.BariatricHTX said:Senior perspective on cardiovascular risk: I'm 71 years old and started this journey skeptically.
Vitamin deficiency cascade with cardiovascular risk: after 6+ months of reduced food intake, I developed a subtle but important pattern: low B12 → elevated homocysteine → increased cardiovascular risk marker.
The connection: B12 is a cofactor for homocysteine metabolism. Without adequate B12, homocysteine accumulates. This is ironic — taking a CV-protective medication while developing a CV risk factor from reduced nutrition.
Solution: comprehensive vitamin supplementation and regular lab monitoring. Don't let the medication's benefits be undermined by nutritional deficiencies.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultslaura_annarbor said:My reason for being on this is cardiovascular rather than cosmetic, which puts me in a small minority in most of these threads.
Second this.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.
laura_annarbor said:...we're creating a generation dependent on cardiovascular risk...
I understand the concern, but consider this analogy: are we "creating a generation dependent on" blood pressure medication? Cholesterol medication? Thyroid medication?
Obesity is a chronic disease with biological drivers. Treating it with medication is no different from treating any other chronic condition. The "dependency" framing implies weakness or moral failure — neither of which is accurate.
If ongoing medication is what keeps someone healthy, that's successful treatment, not dependency.