triple agonist — 9 things I got wrong before I got it right
Something I noticed reading old threads that I have not seen said out loud.
The advice on TRIUMPH in this community changed substantially around the start of last year, and nobody went back and updated the older posts. So depending on which thread the search engine hands you, you get two contradictory answers with the same confidence.
I have listed what I think the current consensus is below. Correct me — that is the point of posting it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
What was the dosing schedule in that arm?
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
Are you quoting phase 2 or is there phase 3 data now?
triple agonism is TRIUMPH, do not generalise
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
Three years on this site and the questions have not changed at all. Which is depressing or reassuring depending on the day.
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
[deleted]
Which trial arm and what was the n?
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone has to re-explain it.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
Removed a chain here.
Disagree on that part. 93.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
- 1Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone…10 comments in this branch · started by u/reflux_report
- 2research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols6 comments in this branch · started by u/rui_only_ro