PharmacoVig_BOS said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
I read this differently from PharmacoVig_BOS, on substance rather than tone. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. With resmetirom now available for MASH, combination approaches are being explored, so the standard of care in this area is moving faster than most threads assume.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
CarlaRPh_TPA said:Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the…
Coming at CarlaRPh_TPA’s question from a different direction. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Whether normalised enzymes tell you anything about fibrosis, and what the right follow-up measurement is?
Reporting back.
Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread. Writing that down for the next person who wants the interesting answer.