anna.melb_AU said:

Resolution therefore closed the doors unevenly, and the asymmetry follows from the bulks lists.

Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.

kevin_tulsa said:

The phase 2 numbers were about 24% mean weight loss at 48 weeks on the top dose, with the curve still descending at the end of the study.

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.

anna.melb_AU said:

Resolution therefore closed the doors unevenly, and the asymmetry follows from the bulks lists.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. A research-chemical supplier selling lyophilised powder labelled research use only is not compounding and is not claiming to. It is a different legal universe with no pharmacy oversight, no patient relationship and no content guarantee, and conflating the two in these threads helps nobody.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. No action needed from anybody.