how much of what we believe about dose escalation actually comes from glucagon threads
how much of what we believe about dose escalation actually comes from glucagon threads, and I want the answer with the reasoning attached rather than just the conclusion.
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.
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.
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.
If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something. Alone it is an anecdote.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Standing reminder in every thread here: unapproved compound, research material is not for human use, nothing on this board is medical advice.
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
triple agonist — GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the glucagon arm is the new part
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.
Yes — the glucagon arm is what makes it a different proposition rather than a stronger version of the others.
the glucagon component is why the metabolic story reads differently
heart rate is the thing people report watching
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
nothing here is available as a prescription product, so read every thread with that in mind
Sent a vial to VendorInvestigate out of curiosity. Result was 97.7% against a claimed 97.5%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
the TRIUMPH programme is still running, so anything definitive is premature
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
- 1Yes — the glucagon arm is what makes it a different proposition rather than…6 comments in this branch · started by u/yannick_barros