[Lab] split one vial across Janoshik and Medutest — 99.2% and 98.9%
Right: split one vial across Janoshik and Medutest — 99.2% and 98.9%. I paid for this one myself, nobody sent me anything, and the receipts are in the comments.
Hard numbers: 99.2% and 98.9%. Anything softer than that is flagged as an impression.
What the glucagon arm is doing, as best anyone can say from public data.
GLP-1 and GIP agonism cover appetite and insulin secretion in ways that are now reasonably well characterised. Glucagon receptor agonism is the third leg and it is associated with increased energy expenditure and with effects on hepatic fat.
Mechanistically that is why this compound reads as a different proposition rather than a stronger version of a dual agonist. Clinically, the size and durability of that difference in humans is precisely what is not yet established, and anyone telling you otherwise is filling a gap with confidence.
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.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Removed the escalation schedule. There is no published protocol for members to follow and inventing one here is exactly what this board does not do.
Glucagon receptor agonism is associated with increased energy expenditure and with hepatic effects. That is a mechanistic story with strong preclinical support and limited phase 2 human data.
[removed by moderator]
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
What do you think the glucagon component is adding, specifically?
wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings
The early fullness profile felt different rather than worse. Hard to describe and impossible to quantify, so take it as an impression.
Yes — the glucagon arm is what makes it a different proposition rather than a stronger version of the others.
This. The phase 2 result was genuinely large and it was also 48 weeks in a few hundred people.
Right, and it bears repeating that nothing here is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
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.
triple agonist — GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the glucagon arm is the new part