went too fast on reta and my resting HR told me before i noticed
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: glucagon matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 21 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 35 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
This is correct.
Adding to this: TRIUMPH is doing more work than the comment implies.
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is glucagon. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had higher mean HR changes.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
Disagree on that part. 99.2% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
- 1the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy10 comments in this branch · started by u/solene_ilunga