the glucagon question that gets asked weekly, answered properly
Genuinely asking, not being difficult.
Everyone in c/newbiequestions repeats that dose escalation is important. I believe it, but I have never seen anyone show why, and when I search I get 20 threads of people agreeing with each other.
Is there a paper? Is there a measurement? Or is this one of those things that is true because it has been repeated since 2023?
I am not trying to be the "source?" guy. I would just like a source.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
What was the dosing schedule in that arm?
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
Adding to this: triple agonist is doing more work than the comment implies.
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
Are you quoting phase 2 or is there phase 3 data now?
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
triple agonism is phase 2, do not generalise
The glucagon component does different things than dual agonism. The muscle cramps are not just amplified versions.
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
The glucagon component does different things than dual agonism.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 59 weeks to accept.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
triple agonism is phase 2, do not generalise
Not to be pedantic but TRIUMPH and phase 2 are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
Not to be pedantic but TRIUMPH and phase 2 are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
Strongly agree. Heart rate escalation needs the actual data, not impressions.
the 2.4mg arm is different from 1.7mg, results do not transfer
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
- 1Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be…11 comments in this branch · started by u/incretin_ivy
- 2Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?9 comments in this branch · started by u/endotoxin_ellie