>This is a very odd phrasing that makes it seem like heart attack and stroke risk are higher for those who stop taking the drug than those who never took the drug.

That does appear to be the case, according to the study.

▲

post-it 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It certainly does not. To make that claim, the study would need a control group of people who had never taken the drug. They didn't have that:

> Participants Veterans Affairs users with type 2 diabetes who started treatment with GLP-1RAs (n=132 551) or sulfonylureas (n=201 136), followed up for three years. Veterans Affairs users were defined as having at least two visits to Veterans Affairs and having used the Veterans Affairs outpatient pharmacy within a year before receiving treatment with GLP-1RAs or sulfonylureas.

	▲	embedding-shape 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> They didn't have that So, why not? Seems very obvious to everyone here on HN that it's "kind of useless" unless they did have that, yet they didn't. What reason would there be for ignoring that?

▲

kube-system 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The conclusion of the study says:

> This study showed that discontinuing and interrupting GLP-1RA treatment could erode and might reverse the cardiovascular benefits of the drug in a duration dependent manner, increasing the risk of cardiovascular events.

emphasis mine

	▲	conception 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Could.