triple agonist: what the trials say vs what this community says
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 10mg, week 20, constipation present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — TRIUMPH — and tracked it for 10 weeks.
Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted it. So I am putting it here rather than presenting it as a finding. If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something.
Not medical advice, obviously. This is one person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
i have this exact spreadsheet
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 57 weeks to accept.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
Flair changed to match the content.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use, posts must not read as instructions
Slight fix: the number was 96.2, not 96.8. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Flair changed to match the content.
Adding to this: TRIUMPH is doing more work than the comment implies.
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
Disagree on that part. 98.4% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
triple agonism is dose escalation, do not generalise
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with glucagon, not with what you concluded.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 98.0% weight loss but the fatigue profile on the highest arm was rough. Phase 2 != phase 3.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 72 weeks to accept.
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
- 1nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring7 comments in this branch · started by u/nabila_bakken
- 2Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next…6 comments in this branch · started by u/reta_and_regret