Secretagogues and glucose tolerance: the mechanistic concern

I had written a reply contradicting the opening post and deleted it. Here is what survived.

Timing arguments in this family generally rest on the assumption that endogenous release is suppressed by circulating glucose and insulin. That is well supported; the practical protocols built on top of it are much less so.

Someone should write this up properly, and it should probably not be me.

Agreed, and I will stop repeating the version of this I had been repeating.

I keep a log for secretagogues and glucose tolerance specifically because my memory of it turned out to be systematically wrong in one direction. Six weeks of notes cost nothing and settled it.

Sermorelin and the growth hormone releasing hormone analogues depend on a functioning pituitary response, which is the mechanistic reason they behave differently in different people rather than a dosing problem.

Posted with less confidence than the sentence structure implies.

Storage: these are lyophilised short peptides and are generally reasonably stable dry and considerably less so in solution. Reconstituting only what will be used within the period the supplier's own data covers is the conservative approach.

Secretagogues and glucose tolerance is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.

Reconstitution volumes in this family are often small enough that dead volume in the syringe is a meaningful fraction of the dose. A fixed-needle insulin syringe is worth the trouble here specifically.

Narrowing post #61, because the general version has more than one answer.

Adding a reference point for secretagogues and glucose tolerance. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.

Nothing to add, except that this is the answer I would give if asked.