u/zeynep_mbeki

the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder

the glucagon component changes the side effect profile, not just the efficacy

Strongly agree.

Adding to this: goal weight is doing more work than the comment implies.

nobody posts about this part and it is the longest part

the weight curves are unusually steep, which makes predicting individual response harder

Are you quoting phase 2 or is there phase 3 data now?

triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual

Dose escalation on retatrutide is steeper and faster than on semaglutide.

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 42 weeks to accept.

the 0.25mg arm is different from 0.5mg, results do not transfer

Disagree on that part. 96.8% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.

Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points.

Disagree on that part. 98.4% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.

Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.

TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter

the 10mg arm is different from 5mg, results do not transfer

triple agonism is glucagon, do not generalise

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 24 weeks to accept.

Crossposting this to c/hplc because the people who need it are not reading this community.

Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.

state how long you have been at maintenance, week 10 is not maintenance

You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.

This is correct. Triple agonism is genuinely different.

Tried the lowest-effective approach. 2.4mg worked for 4 weeks, then cravings returned. 1.0mg was the actual floor.