[Results] 57 weeks, 25kg, and glucagon was the hard part
57 weeks, 25kg, and glucagon was the hard part, logged the same way every week so the comparison is at least internally fair.
Hard numbers: 57 weeks and 25kg. Anything softer than that is flagged as an impression.
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.
Please do not ask me what dose you should be on. I genuinely do not know and neither does anyone else here.
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.
Nothing containing this compound is approved anywhere. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use, and that is a statement of fact rather than a disclaimer.
wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to. It moved a little and I have no idea whether that means anything.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme.
This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first. Phase 2 is not a label.
the TRIUMPH programme is still running, so anything definitive is premature
The reflux profile felt different rather than worse. Hard to describe and impossible to quantify, so take it as an impression.
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
nothing here is available as a prescription product, so read every thread with that in mind
comparing reta phase 2 to sema phase 3 is comparing different things
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
The reflux profile felt different rather than worse.
Adding the standing caveat: none of this is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
Sent a vial to PeptideMeter out of curiosity. Result was 97.6% against a claimed 97.5%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
research-use-only material is not approved for human use, full stop
the glucagon component is why the metabolic story reads differently
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
Adding the standing caveat: none of this is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
Disagree with this specific inference. A 48-week readout does not tell you the shape of the curve after it.
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.
Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is not established in humans at scale.
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.
heart rate is the thing people report watching
This. The phase 2 result was genuinely large and it was also 48 weeks in a few hundred people.
triple agonist — GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the glucagon arm is the new part
[deleted]
phase 2 data only, and people quote it like it is a label
Agreed, and the framing that helps is: this is a phase 2 compound with phase 3 running. Everything else is inference.
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
- 1the TRIUMPH programme is still running, so anything definitive is premature13 comments in this branch · started by u/soren_nkemelu
- 2Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is…7 comments in this branch · started by u/baseline_drifter