Moving off Reta — which other GLP-1R agonist should come first?

[Ontbijtkoek]

bamagirl26 said:

Ontbijtkoek said:

tendency said:

Reta works on me - and keeps working - about as well as it can. Going above 3.5mg/week was never necessary. My wife dropped 35lb without ever exceeding 2.5mg/week. Nothing shreds fat the way Reta does and for the people it agrees with it’s the best .. that’s been my observation anyway. Good luck!

Individual variation in response looks like it’s huge, possibly down to genetic polymorphisms.

My 7th (Tirz)shot went in just now. Weight to lose and feeling better is what I want too, same as you. 6 weeks of better eating habits (food choices) plus exercise and 10 lbs are off. Starting 2.5 for 4 weeks, then up to 3 MG. Staying on a LOW dose appeals to me, maybe with Reta (when I get it) added at a low dose to see how the two behave in tandem with one another. The reta was a group buy and those take longer, so I may be at my goal by the time it lands, but we shall see. One thing I have noticed is that Tirz has really helped with inflammation elsewhere in my body (fingers, knees, even my feet feel happier). Low dose first would be my approach, tapering up SLOWLY to dodge the ugly side effects.

Appreciate you taking the time to share that with us!

 

[quicksilver80]

Ontbijtkoek said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

One thing that is very wierd tbh is how far the experience reported on the forum side diverges from what the clinical trails show.

Being able to make reta doesn’t make it the same thing as elis reta. Rumors Ive read suggest the chemical compound itself can differ from one manufacture to the next. That could explain why some just get wrecked on it and some dont. On top of that, what you believe your dosage is might actually be double, and you’d never know without testing it. Part of elis arguement for calling it a biologic was the special sauce they baked in. Who knows.

 

[Ontbijtkoek]

quicksilver80 said:

Ontbijtkoek said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

One thing that is very wierd tbh is how far the experience reported on the forum side diverges from what the clinical trails show.

Being able to make reta doesn’t make it the same thing as elis reta. Rumors Ive read suggest the chemical compound itself can differ from one manufacture to the next. That could explain why some just get wrecked on it and some dont. On top of that, what you believe your dosage is might actually be double, and you’d never know without testing it. Part of elis arguement for calling it a biologic was the special sauce they baked in. Who knows.

Plausible as far as I can tell, though the drug manufacturing space is a complete blank for me.

 

[finesse]

Triz all the way here.

Nothing beats Triz. End.

 

[cujet]

Ontbijtkoek said:

cujet said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

My dollar would go on Bunk Reta circulating out there. 2 batches I’ve got now simply don’t work well. What I buy from Peptidology still does the job, the others are weaker and/or do nothing at all. Reta looks hard to manufacture, and proteins can always end up misfolded while still testing fine.

Real Retatrutide in the trials sits at a 100% success rate.

Mine went through group testing, so that route is not an option for me. A new vial got tried as well, and it didn’t change anything. It is possible the generic version differs in some unique way, though that would seem unlikely to me.

That’s exactly my point. Differences exist, even when the 'Retatrutide' tests out at 99.xx% purity. Some of it seems only marginally effective, or even completely ineffective. Misfolded proteins are a factor, storage, heat, etc. The sheer number of people getting zero results strongly points to issues with gray Reta.

Saying Tirz is worse isn’t my aim here. Not my point. But now that faketide/bunktide/and ineffective Reta is known to be all too common, putting gray ineffective Reta up against good Tirz is not a valid comparison.

Example: a member here who was talking about a particular vendor said it was the best Reta he had ever purchased, and I think his vendor was BFF. Similar results get posted by others, with certain vendors supplying a far better product.

Edit: FYI, every AI scraping the web for info on how effective gray Reta is has landed on the same conclusion, in their words: "Wildly Inconsistent"

Edit2: On the peptide longevity chart, most of the Retatrutide had not degraded all that much after 90 days. One brand showed 44% degradation at 90 days, another brand under 3%. Not all of them are the same.

 

[SVT810E]

chewonmysac said:

cujet said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

My dollar would go on Bunk Reta circulating out there. 2 batches I’ve got now simply don’t work well. What I buy from Peptidology still does the job, the others are weaker and/or do nothing at all. Reta looks hard to manufacture, and proteins can always end up misfolded while still testing fine.

Real Retatrutide in the trials sits at a 100% success rate.

Triumph-4 Phase 3 results



12.2% @9mg18.2% @12mg4.0% Placebo

Side effects led to discontinuation

Dropouts from the phase 3 reta trials come down to the #1 cause: losing too much weight on the dose people were assigned.

 

[SVT810E]

cujet said:

Ontbijtkoek said:

cujet said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

My dollar would go on Bunk Reta circulating out there. 2 batches I’ve got now simply don’t work well. What I buy from Peptidology still does the job, the others are weaker and/or do nothing at all. Reta looks hard to manufacture, and proteins can always end up misfolded while still testing fine.

Real Retatrutide in the trials sits at a 100% success rate.

Mine went through group testing, so that route is not an option for me. A new vial got tried as well, and it didn’t change anything. It is possible the generic version differs in some unique way, though that would seem unlikely to me.

That’s exactly my point. Differences exist, even when the 'Retatrutide' tests out at 99.xx% purity. Some of it seems only marginally effective, or even completely ineffective. Misfolded proteins are a factor, storage, heat, etc. The sheer number of people getting zero results strongly points to issues with gray Reta.

Saying Tirz is worse isn’t my aim here. Not my point. But now that faketide/bunktide/and ineffective Reta is known to be all too common, putting gray ineffective Reta up against good Tirz is not a valid comparison.

Example: a member here who was talking about a particular vendor said it was the best Reta he had ever purchased, and I think his vendor was BFF. Similar results get posted by others, with certain vendors supplying a far better product.

Edit: FYI, every AI scraping the web for info on how effective gray Reta is has landed on the same conclusion, in their words: "Wildly Inconsistent"

Edit2: On the peptide longevity chart, most of the Retatrutide had not degraded all that much after 90 days. One brand showed 44% degradation at 90 days, another brand under 3%. Not all of them are the same.

One thread runs through nearly every social media complaint about reta being ineffective: the complainants are almost all people attempting to switch away from high dose tirz. Whatever the reason, that switch doesn’t appear to go well.

In the trials, the patients are mostly new to GLP-1s, and there it seems to work extremely well. Same story anecdotally — gray reta seems to work extremely well for people new to GLP-1s. But the ones who took the popular advice, starting with tirz and switching to reta once they plateau? Those people almost always seem to have problems.

 

[Ontbijtkoek]

cujet said:

Ontbijtkoek said:

cujet said:

chewonmysac said:

A second thread inside an hour where Reta takes a beating. The trend seems clear. Some (2x R24 kits) of it sit here too, but they’ll likely never get used. Steam is going out of the hype train.

My dollar would go on Bunk Reta circulating out there. 2 batches I’ve got now simply don’t work well. What I buy from Peptidology still does the job, the others are weaker and/or do nothing at all. Reta looks hard to manufacture, and proteins can always end up misfolded while still testing fine.

Real Retatrutide in the trials sits at a 100% success rate.

Mine went through group testing, so that route is not an option for me. A new vial got tried as well, and it didn’t change anything. It is possible the generic version differs in some unique way, though that would seem unlikely to me.

That’s exactly my point. Differences exist, even when the 'Retatrutide' tests out at 99.xx% purity. Some of it seems only marginally effective, or even completely ineffective. Misfolded proteins are a factor, storage, heat, etc. The sheer number of people getting zero results strongly points to issues with gray Reta.

Saying Tirz is worse isn’t my aim here. Not my point. But now that faketide/bunktide/and ineffective Reta is known to be all too common, putting gray ineffective Reta up against good Tirz is not a valid comparison.

Example: a member here who was talking about a particular vendor said it was the best Reta he had ever purchased, and I think his vendor was BFF. Similar results get posted by others, with certain vendors supplying a far better product.

Edit: FYI, every AI scraping the web for info on how effective gray Reta is has landed on the same conclusion, in their words: "Wildly Inconsistent"

Edit2: On the peptide longevity chart, most of the Retatrutide had not degraded all that much after 90 days. One brand showed 44% degradation at 90 days, another brand under 3%. Not all of them are the same.

More information will likely surface in time on this whole question of generic glp-1 quality — retatrutide above all, since that one appears to be the most variable of the whole set.