Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.
I'm 48 years old and want to share my perspective on cardiovascular risk as an older member of this community.
My doctor was initially hesitant because of my age, but the SELECT trial included patients up to 72 and showed consistent benefit across age groups. We started at the lowest dose with closer monitoring.
15 months later: down 52 lbs, off atorvastatin, A1C from 8.4% to 5.5%. My cardiologist is thrilled. cardiovascular risk is absolutely relevant for older adults — don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
wendy_avl said:I want to bring up the cardiovascular angle on cardiovascular risk.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly.
NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).
From SELECT trial: MACE at 39 months — 6.5% semaglutide vs 8.0% placebo. ARR = 1.5%. NNT = 67 over 3.3 years.
Compare to established therapies:
| Intervention | NNT | Timeframe |
|---|---|---|
| Semaglutide (MACE) | 67 | 3.3 years |
| Statins primary prevention (MI) | ~100 | 5 years |
| Aspirin secondary prevention | ~77 | 2 years |
These NNTs are clinically meaningful and comparable to accepted cardiovascular interventions.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.ObesityLA said:NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.