GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
4.8k
c/retatrutide·posted 5 months ago by u/source_or_silence

[Results] 88 weeks on 2.4mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring

Results Cold Box ×7 Long Haul ×2 Receipts ×2

Six-word version is the title — 88 weeks on 2.4mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring — and the rest is context.

Hard numbers: 88 weeks and 2.4mg. Anything softer than that is flagged as an impression.

The phase 2 readout ran to 48 weeks in a few hundred participants with a slow escalation. Both the size and the duration matter when people quote the headline number.

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.

Sceptical readings welcome. The confident ones are the ones I distrust.

5,220 up / 378 down93% upvoted31 commentsid wqumq615 Feb 2026

31 comments

24 in this archive, depth 4

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/liver_enzyme_liz1.1k points·5 months ago

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.

replysharereportpermalink
u/source_or_silenceOP1.3k points·5 months ago

Read the phase 2 paper twice before ordering anything. Recommend that to anyone in this board: the error bars are the interesting part.

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]533 points·5 months ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/viktor_laurent307 points·5 months ago

Not convinced. You are attributing a week of injection-site soreness to the glucagon arm when the escalation rate alone would explain it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ferran_krastev668 points·5 months ago

wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings

replysharereportpermalink
u/employer_carveout734 points·5 months ago

Has anyone posted an independent test on this compound recently?

replysharereportpermalink
u/ismael_eriksen305 points·5 months ago

Agreed, and the framing that helps is: this is a phase 2 compound with phase 3 running. Everything else is inference.

replysharereportpermalink
u/hassan_nilsen150 points·5 months ago

the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven

replysharereportpermalink
u/nadia_trevino467 points·5 months ago·edited

Phase 2 estimates effect and finds a dose range. Phase 3 estimates it precisely in a bigger population and catches what phase 2 was too small to see. Treating them as the same tier of evidence is the recurring error here.

replysharereportpermalink
u/renzo_yildiz132 points·5 months ago·edited

Careful with the rankings. A phase 2 result and a phase 3 result are not on the same evidential footing and cannot be listed in one table.

replysharereportpermalink
u/nikhil_lindqvist95 points·5 months ago

the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits

replysharereportpermalink
u/cagrilintide_enthusiast35 points·5 months ago

Are you comparing against phase 3 numbers for something else? They are not comparable.

replysharereportpermalink
u/fabio_lehtinen11 points·5 months ago

Are you tracking heart rate at all?

replysharereportpermalink
u/source_or_silenceOP0 points·5 months ago

Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?

replysharereportpermalink
u/cagrilintide_enthusiast1 point·5 months ago·edited

Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?

Agreed, and the glucagon arm is exactly why the comparison threads do not work.

replysharereportpermalink
u/blunt_coldbox_2024237 points·5 months ago

What the glucagon arm is doing, as best anyone can say from public data.

GLP-1 and GIP agonism cover appetite and insulin secretion in ways that are now reasonably well characterised. Glucagon receptor agonism is the third leg and it is associated with increased energy expenditure and with effects on hepatic fat.

Mechanistically that is why this compound reads as a different proposition rather than a stronger version of a dual agonist. Clinically, the size and durability of that difference in humans is precisely what is not yet established, and anyone telling you otherwise is filling a gap with confidence.

replysharereportpermalink
u/nausea_notesside effects177 points·5 months ago

What the glucagon arm is doing, as best anyone can say from public data.

Disagree with this specific inference. A 48-week readout does not tell you the shape of the curve after it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/source_or_silenceOP125 points·5 months ago

How fast was the escalation? That is usually the variable that explains the reports.

replysharereportpermalink
u/devils_advocate_d105 points·5 months ago

What the glucagon arm is doing, as best anyone can say from public data.

This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first. Phase 2 is not a label.

replysharereportpermalink
u/yara_lindholm57 points·5 months ago

Disagree. "More receptors means more effect" is not how any of this works and the trial data does not support the linear story.

replysharereportpermalink
u/deleted_my_history64 points·5 months ago·edited

This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first.

devils_advocate_d is right about the escalation being the variable. It explains most of the difficult reports here.

replysharereportpermalink
u/anya_moreau82 points·5 months ago

dose escalation in the trials was slow for a reason

replysharereportpermalink
u/heart_rate_bump55 points·5 months ago

phase 2 data only, and people quote it like it is a label

replysharereportpermalink
u/hugo_pires139 points·5 months ago·edited

What the glucagon arm is doing, as best anyone can say from public data.

Adding the standing caveat: none of this is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/retatrutide

Retatrutide: GIP/GLP-1/glucagon triple agonism, the TRIUMPH programme, and the fact that most people discussing it are handling research-grade material with no human-use approval anywhere. Dose-response, heart-rate signal, and the unusually steep phase-2 weight curves get argued about here weekly.

65kmembers
130submissions
Sep 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/retatrutide rules
  1. Retatrutide is not approved anywhere for human use. Posts must not read as usage instructions.
  2. Phase 2 numbers are not maintenance numbers. Cite the trial and the dose arm.
  3. Heart-rate and dose-escalation reports need actual measurements, not impressions.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.