This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Timing separation is the standard mitigation where absorption rate is the concern, and the interval that matters depends on the other drug rather than on this one.
One of those cases where knowing the mechanism does not help the decision.
A pharmacist can answer most questions in this subcategory in a few minutes with access to a proper interaction database, and that access is the thing a forum does not have.
Everything in post #91 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
Separation timing versus clinically important interaction: a separation timing inconvenience (taking one medication 2 hours before or after another) is not the same as a clinically important interaction. Both can reduce absorption of one or the other, but only true interactions require active management.
Practical answer on common supplements, since the theoretical one is upthread: do the simplest check first, write down the result, and only then decide whether the complicated explanation is needed. It usually is not.
Picking up post #96: that is the part I would want checked first.
One more thing on common supplements that took me far too long to see: the two figures people quote are not measuring the same quantity. Once you notice that, the apparent contradiction disappears.
Narrowing post #98, because the general version has more than one answer.
The most defensible general position in this subcategory: identify the plausible mechanism, check whether it has been studied, and where it has not, say that rather than filling the gap.
I have separated what I observed from what I concluded, which does not always happen.
Everything in post #100 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
The useful distinction on common supplements is between what was measured and what was inferred from it. Both end up in the same sentence and only one of them has error bars.
What would change my mind on common supplements is a second dataset collected by someone with no stake in the first. Until then I hold it loosely and I would rather say so than pretend to more.
I read post #104 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Metformin: commonly co-administered and relevant to gastrointestinal tolerability. Gastrointestinal side effects can overlap and additive. Taking them separately or adjusting one if tolerability is poor are reasonable approaches.
I have no interest in any supplier named above.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
About the Interactions category
Drug, supplement and food interactions — separating timing inconveniences from clinically important ones. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is…
|
+4 | 8 | 1.9k | 2mo |
|
Sulfonylureas: the interaction most worth taking seriously
Sulfonylureas: the interaction most worth taking seriously Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. An honest uncertainty about sulfonylureas rather than a disguised…
|
+4 | 8 | 38k | 6h |
|
Second pass at: Metformin co-administration and additive GI effects
On the subject in the title: Second pass at: Metformin co-administration and additive GI effects Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting a small dataset on Metformin co-administration. It is mine, it…
|
+131 | 142 | 56k | 19d |
|
Grapefruit: why this class is not the class that cares
Grapefruit: why this class is not the class that cares Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I was wrong about grapefruit in a thread last spring and I would like…
|
+126 | 139 | 4k | 4mo |
|
Delayed gastric emptying and oral medication absorption: which drugs matter — one year on
On the subject in the title: Delayed gastric emptying and oral medication absorption: which drugs matter — one year on Working notes rather than a conclusion. A follow-up question about Delayed gastric…
|
3 | 16k | 2mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Muscle cramps: the ordinary causes before the exotic ones
Muscle cramps: the ordinary causes before the exotic ones Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Proposing that muscle cramps deserves a maintained page rather than…
|
+80 | 90 | 27k | 6mo |
|
Coming back to: Injection-site reactions: describing them precisely enough to be useful
On the subject in the title: Injection-site reactions: describing them precisely enough to be useful Working notes rather than a conclusion. Reading back through what has been written here about…
|
+21 | 25 | 22k | 8mo |
|
Naming conventions for research peptides and the confusion they cause — one year on
Naming conventions for research peptides and the confusion they cause — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about Naming conventions for research peptides…
|
+1 | 5 | 181 | 2y |
|
Research-use-only status: what it means legally and practically — does this still hold?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Research-use-only status: what it means legally and practically — does this still hold? Asking about Research-use-only status directly, because I…
|
2 | 309 | 9mo | |
|
BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — does this still hold?
The question in the title: BPC-157: what the rodent literature actually shows, and what it does not — does this still hold? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I would like to…
|
+6 | 10 | 3.1k | 1d |