Older adults, sarcopenia risk, and the trade-off nobody quantifies posts 31–60

I have been on both sides of the older adults argument in this category within eighteen months, which should tell you how strong the evidence for either side is.

Right — I had this wrong and I am glad to have read it before it mattered.

Older adults were included in the trials in smaller numbers than their share of the eventual population, so precision in that subgroup is poor.

I would hold that lightly until someone with a larger sample weighs in.

Confirming post #45 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

Post-surgical populations, particularly after procedures affecting the gastrointestinal tract, interact with a delayed-emptying mechanism in ways that need specialist input.

That is the practical version. The rigorous version is longer and says the same thing.

Narrowing post #48, because the general version has more than one answer.

What I want from this older adults thread is the list of things that would need to be true for the claim to hold. If we can write that list, we can check it.

Genetic and ancestry-related differences in response are asked about regularly and the published evidence is thin enough that the honest answer is short.

That has held every time I have looked, which is not the same as always.

This is the answer, and the reason it is the answer is the more useful part.

Filing a mild objection to the consensus on older adults. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit.

Where I part company with post #50, and it is a narrow parting.

Older adults was covered in the wiki last year and the page has a review date on it, which is a better starting point than my memory of a thread.

Body weight at the extremes of the studied range affects exposure and the trials rarely reported enough to say by how much.

That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct.

Older adults: sarcopenia risk is higher, polypharmacy is common, and the clinical trials did not enroll many people over 75. Extrapolating to very old people is extrapolating beyond the data.

Confirming post #56 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

Practical experience of older adults, offered as one case with the conditions stated, not as a general finding. Conditions first, because they are what make it interpretable.

I had written a reply contradicting post #54 and deleted it. Here is what survived.

Nothing in this subcategory is medical advice and the questions asked here are precisely the ones that need an individual assessment.

The answer changed when I changed how I was measuring, which was informative.

Post #56 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

The reason older adults is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent.

I read post #58 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Body weight at the extremes of the studied range affects exposure and the trials rarely reported enough to say by how much.