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…
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.