week 32 check-in — 14kg down, nausea manageable, one thing confusing me
week 32 check-in — 14kg down, nausea manageable, one thing confusing me, and the part I actually want to talk about is at the bottom.
Numbers, in the order they matter: week 32 and 14kg.
Nothing containing this compound is approved anywhere. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use, and that is a statement of fact rather than a disclaimer.
Phase 2 estimates effect and finds a dose range. Phase 3 estimates it precisely in a bigger population and catches what phase 2 was too small to see. Treating them as the same tier of evidence is the recurring error here.
Not medical advice, obviously, and nothing here is approved for human use. One person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Increases in heart rate have been reported across this receptor class. The magnitude and clinical significance are exactly what phase 3 is powered to establish.
Independent purity testing on this compound is thin compared with the older molecules, simply because fewer members have paid for it. Fewer results means wider uncertainty, not a verdict.
Are you comparing against phase 3 numbers for something else? They are not comparable.
Has anyone posted an independent test on this compound recently?
Are you tracking heart rate at all?
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
Sceptical of the extrapolation. Forty-eight weeks does not tell you about seventy-two, and the curve shape is exactly what is unknown.
Not convinced. You are attributing a week of fatigue to the glucagon arm when the escalation rate alone would explain it.
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
Went up slowly, deliberately, because everything on this board says the escalation is where trouble lives. Uneventful so far and I am not going to pretend that is a finding.
Disagree. "More receptors means more effect" is not how any of this works and the trial data does not support the linear story.
small trial, big effect, wide error bars
Careful with the rankings. A phase 2 result and a phase 3 result are not on the same evidential footing and cannot be listed in one table.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
Right, and it bears repeating that nothing here is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
Sent a vial to Janoshik out of curiosity. Result was 98.9% against a claimed 98.5%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
not approved anywhere, which is the single most important fact in this board
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.
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
That reads as a titration plan for an unapproved compound. This board cannot host that and it should not want to.
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings
Stopped at a low step because there was no reason to go further and no data to tell me what further would do.
the glucagon component is why the metabolic story reads differently
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.
- 1Increases in heart rate have been reported across this receptor class. The…7 comments in this branch · started by u/hassan_nilsen