triple agonist is the most under-discussed thing on this board
triple agonist is the most under-discussed thing on this board, which sounds obvious until you try to state the evidence for it. Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data. Where the evidence actually stands, since every thread here assumes a different answer.…
The standing caveat, written out properly because it keeps getting compressed into a footnote.
Nothing containing this compound is approved by any regulator. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use. That is not a legal formality on this board — it is why there is so little independent data, why the escalation schedules people post are invented, and why nobody here can answer a dosing question.
What this board can usefully do is read the published trials carefully, log independent purity results, and be honest about how thin the evidence base is. Everything else belongs somewhere with a clinician in it.
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
Are you comparing against phase 3 numbers for something else? They are not comparable.
research-use-only material is not approved for human use, full stop
It is a triple agonist at the GLP-1, GIP and glucagon receptors. The glucagon arm is the genuinely novel component and it is the one with the least human outcome data behind it.
Correcting my own comment above: that figure was the 36-week interim, not the 48-week endpoint.
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.