what changed for me between month 8 and month 16
what changed for me between month 8 and month 16, and I want the answer with the reasoning attached rather than just the conclusion.
Sent a vial to Medutest out of curiosity. Result was 99.2% against a claimed 98.5%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to. It moved a little and I have no idea whether that means anything.
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
The phase 2 readout ran to 48 weeks in a few hundred participants with a slow escalation. Both the size and the duration matter when people quote the headline number.
Stopped at a low step because there was no reason to go further and no data to tell me what further would do.
Yes — the glucagon arm is what makes it a different proposition rather than a stronger version of the others.
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
Left up. It reads the phase 2 paper carefully and it is honest about the intervals.
Which phase 2 arm are you quoting, and at what week?
Read the phase 2 paper twice before ordering anything. Recommend that to anyone in this board: the error bars are the interesting part.
Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
That is body weight change, not fat mass. The trials report the first and people quote it as the second.
small trial, big effect, wide error bars
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
heart rate is the thing people report watching
Right, and it bears repeating that nothing here is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
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.
research-use-only material is not approved for human use, full stop
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
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.
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.
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.
- 1Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?7 comments in this branch · started by u/honest_syringe33