I would start lower than 1 mg, maybe 0,5 mg, if you are not used to glp-1.
Question about the dosage of reta
- Thread starter shxisxui
- Start date
- Status
My TS started at 2mg/week but I split the dose because I didn’t know how his body would react. So 1 mg, 3 days apart. That way I could back it off quickly if there was some unexpected response. I did that the first 2 weeks. Response was great, so now TS is going to 6mg next week and will continue titrations upward. Edited for grammar.
There are absolutely uncontrolled variables in the official studies too. The people in the studies aren't lab rats. They aren't bred to be genetically similar. They aren't kept in cages and given the same food and water. Its just a bunch of random people, different eating habits, different activity levels. The only stable data points is time and dosage. woohoo.deleted.user.18 said:
Hey, I won't deny that the human trials don't provide valuable information. Yup. We know that the stuff isn't likely to kill us provided we keep our dosage under the maximum used for the duration of the trial. We know that significant weight loss is very likely to happen. We know what kind of side effects to look out for. But sorry .. the study doesn't tell us what dosage schedule is best for us.
That was my point all along.keangkong said:
- Member Since
- Oct 7, 2025
- Posts
- 179
- Likes Received
- 1,052
No they aren’t lab rats, we agree on this. However your statements are an oversimplification and biased. RCTs are designed to account for the variability through randomization and participant selection. Randomization of test subjects helps balance known differences, and mitigate the errors introduced by unknown differences as well as outlier responses. That is why the data are superior to single point anecdotal case studies, or forum posts vs. leaning on cognitive biases that put more weight on emotion and what we want to believe. A valuable take away from the studies is avoiding the confusion between “this is typical” and “this happened once” outcomes. When a person delivers information in absolutes (and we all do it, no judgement) we must pause to ask is this statement reasonable and typical or is it biased. Our brains are wired to trust the familiar, emotional, and personal over the abstract and statistical. Science, however, exists precisely to correct that instinct. Is it perfect? No. But it is a movement in the direction of evidence based choices, and away from blind faith. Direction > perfection.MsGizmo said:
The 0.5mg starting dose of Reta is also well studied and there are ample data available for consideration in a person’s investigation. As well as a 1mg, 2mg and 4mg starting dose. None of these are deviations from the RCTs protocols. The efficacy and results are there to inform us. If a person thinks this is a good starting dose, it is better to present unbiased evidence as to why, than present personal experience.
Our debate I’m afraid has only served to stifle the OPs original question. So I will not reply further on the debate. But as I asked before, I will ask again. @shxisxui others could better point you to tailored data (or opinion/experience) if you shared more about your circumstances, purpose and desired outcome. Would you be comfortable doing so?
- Member Since
- Sep 2, 2024
- Posts
- 876
- Likes Received
- 6,148
The approaches used in the trials are not set in stone. Nor is the advice given by the FDA approved instructions as to dose to be applied religiously. I'm not sure that our actual approach is that different.MsGizmo said:
- Status
