🍪 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 OutcomesGLP-1 and arterial inflammation — March 2026

GLP-1 and arterial inflammation — March 2026

laura_annarbor Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 3:06 AM 28 replies 1,163 viewsPage 1 of 6
laura_annarbor
Member
189
890
Dec 2024
Ann Arbor, MI
Dec 16, 2025 at 3:06 AM#1

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.

5 8labquiet_amy, emily_PDX, Dr.SleepRoch and 2 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.BariatricHTX
Senior Member
1,456
7,234
Feb 2024
Houston, TX
Dec 16, 2025 at 4:16 AM#2
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.

6 9pete_RVA, CarlaRPh_TPA, steph_laguna and 3 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.PathRoch
Member
456
2,123
Jun 2024
Rochester, MN
Dec 16, 2025 at 5:26 AM#3
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.

7 10WendyG_ATL, SaraMom3, Dr.MetabolicMD and 4 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
BrianDallas92
Member
312
1,456
Oct 2024
Dallas, TX
Dec 16, 2025 at 6:36 AM#4
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.

Second this.

Last edited: Dec 16, 2025 at 7:36 AM
8 11Dr.EndoEP, GraceAZ_72, carl_compliance and 5 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.SurgeonPGH
Senior Member
1,345
6,789
Mar 2024
Pittsburgh, PA
Dec 16, 2025 at 1:21 PM#5

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.

Last edited: Dec 16, 2025 at 4:21 PM
9 12B12Beth, RickReta_CO, PharmHunterJen and 6 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
1236

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