there is no long term safety data, phase 2 and an ongoing phase 3 programme is what exists, thats one data point
#retatrutide 2024-10-19
Saturday44 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- peak_split — you are not there for the glucose effect. glucagon receptor agonism increases energy expenditure and drives hepatic fat mobilisation 21:13
- vial_ledger — that framing helped me more than any diagram 21:16
- vial_ledger — rough shape of the arms, and im deliberately vague where i am not certain 22:14
- turnaround_tam — which nobody quoting the 24% ever mentions 22:18
- ferrous_ash — which is the whole reason this channel is more careful than the other two. we are talking about a compound with one published mid stage trial 22:32
follow up nobody should read my log as a plan, im recording what i did and thats all it is
is the phase 2 dosing anywhere near what people here run
baseline 58
wk 2 61
wk 4 64
wk 6 67
wk 8 66
wk 10 65 (held dose from wk 7)the heart rate thing is real enough that i mention it whenever someone asks about starting
did the phase 2 plateau or was it still moving at the end
site-rotation-map.png
1000 × 700 · 892 KB · not retained in the public archive
follow up how long before people saw the first change at 5
[edited]Medutest came back 98.6 on one lot and 99.4 on the next from the same JEEP, both fine
nobody should read my log as a plan, im recording what i did and thats all it is
is TRIUMPH the phase 3 programme
medutest-report-b-0114.pdf
3 pages · 307 KB · not retained in the public archive
blood pressure stayed flat for me while heart rate moved, which i didnt expect, ill dig out the number
transit-times.csv
557 rows · not retained in the public archive
how do people square the research use only framing with logging their own use
held at 2 for 26 months and it never plateaued for me, which i cant explain
low and slow here means smaller steps than i ever used on tirzepatide, thats the received wisdom
why does everyone insist on smaller steps here than on the other two
🙏1
i was wrong to call the heart rate a non issue last year, enough people logged it that i changed my mind
21:06blank_slate_bo joined the channel
so tirz is two receptors and reta is three. whats the third one doing
glucagon receptor. and it is the counterintuitive one, because glucagon raises blood sugar
why would you want that in a weight drug
you are not there for the glucose effect. glucagon receptor agonism increases energy expenditure and drives hepatic fat mobilisation
the GLP-1 arm is doing enough glucose lowering to cover for it. thats the bet
that framing helped me more than any diagram
🧠11
so GLP-1 for appetite, GIP for tolerability and metabolic effects, glucagon for burn
crude but broadly the story people tell. each of those claims has an argument attached to it
is the burn part measurable or is it theoretical
energy expenditure effects show up in the earlier glucagon co-agonist literature. the liver fat signal is quite clear
for retatrutide specifically the published phase 2 was a weight and safety trial, not a calorimetry study
48 weeks, top arm 12mg, mean weight reduction around 24%
24 percent
😳14
yes, and thats a phase 2 with a few hundred people, not a phase 3 with thousands
and the curve had not flattened at 48 weeks, which is the part that made everyone lose their minds
still going down at the end of the trial, yes. thats a real observation and it is not a prediction
rough shape of the arms, and im deliberately vague where i am not certain
| Arm | Escalation | 48 wk weight change |
|---|---|---|
| 1 mg | no real titration | modest, high single digits |
| 4 mg | two different schemes tested | mid teens |
| 8 mg | two different schemes tested | low twenties |
| 12 mg | stepwise | around -24% |
| placebo | — | small |
why two escalation schemes for the same dose
because they were partly testing how fast you can get there without wrecking tolerability. that was one of the actual questions
which nobody quoting the 24% ever mentions
📌5
whats TRIUMPH
the phase 3 programme. several trials, different populations, including a cardiovascular outcomes one
so the answers people want will exist. they just do not exist yet
which is the whole reason this channel is more careful than the other two. we are talking about a compound with one published mid stage trial
research use only. not approved for people. we say it here more often than anywhere else and thats deliberate
correct
✅16
coming back to your burn question answer — is there anything measuring resting metabolic rate on reta in humans yet
nothing published that i would lean on. some of us have body composition scans and thats not the same measurement
see #bloodwork, three of us have DEXA series. small numbers and inconsistent timing, but its something