🍪 CompoundTalk 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 OutcomesShould I be worried about my heart rate going up? — my results so far

Should I be worried about my heart rate going up? — my results so far

MikeFit_NJ Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 2:42 AM 7 replies 1,295 viewsPage 1 of 2
This thread is more than 10 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
MikeFit_NJ
Senior Member
1,567
6,543
Apr 2024
New Jersey
Jul 30, 2025 at 2:42 AM#1

Prescribed on cardiovascular grounds rather than for weight, and almost everything written for patients assumes the opposite.

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.

What I am trying to establish is how much of the SELECT benefit is plausibly independent of the weight loss, and whether that distinction changes anything practical.

Numbers rather than impressions, if you have them.

14 17LeilaHI, marcus_mpls, DeniseRN_TPA and 11 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
mike.trainer_LA
Senior Member
1,567
7,234
Apr 2024
Los Angeles, CA
Jul 30, 2025 at 2:54 AM#2
MikeFit_NJ said:
Prescribed on cardiovascular grounds rather than for weight, and almost everything written for patients assumes the opposite.
MikeFit_NJ 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.

15 18newstart_MO, mia_MS2, LeilaHI and 12 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
gary_naperville
Member
245
1,123
Oct 2024
Naperville, IL
Jul 30, 2025 at 3:06 AM#3
mike.trainer_LA said:
MikeFit_NJ said: ...cardiovascular risk is just another fad...

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.

16 19TomTeleRx, DoseLogDan, SleepFixSam and 13 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing

Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.

Verify Your Peptides

GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer

Est. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.

Browse GL Biochem
mel_PDX
Member
189
890
Dec 2024
Portland, OR
Jul 30, 2025 at 3:18 AM#4
MikeFit_NJ said:
Prescribed on cardiovascular grounds rather than for weight, and almost everything written for patients assumes the opposite.

Mine went the same way, slower. Posting only so the count is not one.

17 20BiostatsBrad, PeptideSynthNJ, Dr.KarenChen and 14 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.RenalNash
VIP Member
1,234
7,890
Mar 2024
Nashville, TN
Jul 30, 2025 at 4:20 AM#5

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

Cardiac biomarkers and cardiovascular risk: my cardiologist ordered advanced cardiac labs given my family history. Results were encouraging:

  • NT-proBNP: 72 pg/mL (normal, cardiac function preserved)
  • Lp(a): 52 nmol/L (genetic, unchanged — expected)
  • ApoB: dropped from 157 to 97 mg/dL (excellent response)
  • Coronary calcium score: 0 (unchanged from baseline — reassuring)

The ApoB reduction is particularly meaningful — it's considered the best single predictor of cardiovascular risk. GLP-1 therapy seems to improve this consistently.

Last edited: Jul 30, 2025 at 9:20 AM
18 21maria_elpaso, anders_CPH, Dr.NutriCornell and 15 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