[Discussion] can we stop arguing about triple agonist until somebody posts a number
Genuine question, and the title is the question: can we stop arguing about triple agonist until somebody posts a number.
Stopped at a low step because there was no reason to go further and no data to tell me what further would do.
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
Happy to answer the boring questions. Those are usually the ones worth asking.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
Standing reminder in every thread here: unapproved compound, research material is not for human use, nothing on this board is medical advice.
Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?
research-use-only material is not approved for human use, full stop
How fast was the escalation? That is usually the variable that explains the reports.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
- 1Standing reminder in every thread here: unapproved compound, research…6 comments in this branch · started by u/incretin_ivy