Reading the retatrutide phase 2 data properly rather than the headline, and the 24% figure is doing a lot of work that the confidence interval does not support as firmly as people think.
What I actually want to know is why adding glucagon agonism to an anti-obesity drug is not self-defeating, given that glucagon raises blood glucose.
I would rather have one careful answer than five confident ones.
This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
HPLC_Greg said:Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then…
No disagreement with HPLC_Greg. One condition attached. 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. A curve that has not flattened is a real finding, but it also means the true plateau is unknown, and phase 2 populations are small and selected.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL Biochemingrid_STO said:Reading the retatrutide phase 2 data properly rather than the headline, and the 24% figure is doing a lot of work that the confidence interval does…
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.