is it normal to get early fullness at week 64
Check-in as promised in the title: is it normal to get early fullness at week 64.
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.
Independent purity testing on this compound is thin compared with the older molecules, simply because fewer members have paid for it. Fewer results means wider uncertainty, not a verdict.
Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.
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.
phase 2 data only, and people quote it like it is a label
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
Standing reminder in every thread here: unapproved compound, research material is not for human use, nothing on this board is medical advice.
Agreed, and the glucagon arm is exactly why the comparison threads do not work.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
Sent a vial to Medutest out of curiosity. Result was 99.5% against a claimed 99.0%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
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.
Right, and it bears repeating that nothing here is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is not established in humans at scale.
Same read.
Adding the standing caveat: none of this is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
heart rate is the thing people report watching
Where the evidence actually stands, since every thread here assumes a different answer.
Phase 2 reported a large mean body weight change at 48 weeks across a few hundred participants with a slow, protocol-driven escalation. The effect size was striking. The confidence intervals were wide, the population was small, and the duration was under a year.
Phase 3 is running. Until it reports, everything else — including the ranking arguments this board loves — is extrapolation from a small study. That is not a criticism of the compound; it is a description of the evidence.
What do you think the glucagon component is adding, specifically?
Stopped at a low step because there was no reason to go further and no data to tell me what further would do.
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
comparing reta phase 2 to sema phase 3 is comparing different things
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
Agreed, and the framing that helps is: this is a phase 2 compound with phase 3 running. Everything else is inference.
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.
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to.
This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first. Phase 2 is not a label.
Has anyone posted an independent test on this compound recently?
Sceptical of the extrapolation. Forty-eight weeks does not tell you about seventy-two, and the curve shape is exactly what is unknown.
- 1Standing reminder in every thread here: unapproved compound, research…7 comments in this branch · started by u/incretin_ivy
- 2Agreed, and the framing that helps is: this is a phase 2 compound with phase…6 comments in this branch · started by u/fabio_lehtinen