help me understand glucagon, I have read the wiki twice
Been lurking in c/sideeffects for about 5 months and finally have something worth posting.
Short version: week 24, 1.7mg, and triple agonist is the bit I still cannot get a straight answer on. I have read the wiki, I have read the last 39 threads, and the answers split roughly down the middle.
What I actually want to know is whether the people saying it does not matter have measured it, or whether it is just repeated confidently. Happy to be told I am overthinking this — I probably am — but I would rather overthink it now than at week 30.
best — the order this archive was captured in
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
Which trial arm and what was the n?
The heart rate signal in TRIUMPH is real and concerning. Higher doses had higher mean HR changes.
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose.
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 95.1% on the same vial is normal.
Which trial arm and what was the n?
Dose escalation on retatrutide is steeper and faster than on semaglutide. Do not assume the titration patterns transfer.
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
[removed by moderator]
research use only, handling and analysis, not protocols
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
nobody should be giving this to anyone without extensive monitoring
the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder
Did you actually measure heart rate or is that a feeling?
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
heart rate and dose escalation need actual measurements, not impressions
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers, cite the trial
TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 98.6% weight loss but the constipation profile on the highest arm was rough. Phase 2 != phase 3.
Which trial arm and what was the n?
the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy
Which trial arm and what was the n?
Disagree on that part. 93.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.
This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.
TRIUMPH phase 2 showed 98.0% weight loss but the the food-noise thing profile on the highest arm was rough. Phase 2 != phase 3.
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
- 1the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy8 comments in this branch · started by u/two_mil_or_one
- 2Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.8 comments in this branch · started by u/lurker_for_years