the triple agonist thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down
Something I noticed reading old threads that I have not seen said out loud.
The advice on TRIUMPH in this community changed substantially around the start of last year, and nobody went back and updated the older posts. So depending on which thread the search engine hands you, you get two contradictory answers with the same confidence.
I have listed what I think the current consensus is below. Correct me — that is the point of posting it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
triple agonism is phase 2, do not generalise
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 19 weeks to accept.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
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
TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 99.0% weight loss but the early fullness profile on the highest arm was rough. Phase 2 != phase 3.
Which trial arm and what was the n?