anyone else notice phase 2 kicking in around week 44
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 22 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 5 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
The glucagon component does different things than dual agonism. The early fullness are not just amplified versions.
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 98.9% weight loss but the constipation profile on the highest arm was rough. Phase 2 != phase 3.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
the 0.25mg arm is different from 0.5mg, results do not transfer
the 0.25mg arm is different from 0.5mg, results do not transfer
Disagree on that part. 96.8% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
triple agonism is triple agonist, do not generalise
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 59 weeks to accept.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
- 1TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 98.9% weight loss but the constipation profile on the…7 comments in this branch · started by u/halima_mbeki