SubparMarioBro
Member

From: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2411528
That’s a 41% lean mass loss ratio. Semaglutide was 39% and tirzepatide was 25%.
Kind of bad news for those hoping that glucagon is beneficial for muscle retention.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Yeah. Semaglutide was right there as well at 39%, and mazdutide’s number is probably made worse by this being a 48 week trial (vs the usual 70). Front-loaded water weight changes and less time to make up for it with fat loss later on.I don't take the LBM loss too seriously. These people they run these test on are not upping their protein nor are they weight training. A 60/40 loss is pretty standard actually on a simple calorie restriction with no extra protein or weight training.
They take some big lazy fatty, give them a series of injections, and then take measurements after a month or two of sitting on their ass. Not helpful at all.I don't take the LBM loss too seriously. These people they run these test on are not upping their protein nor are they weight training. A 60/40 loss is pretty standard actually on a simple calorie restriction with no extra protein or weight training.
I've gained lean mass the entire time on reta.View attachment 330764
From: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2411528
That’s a 41% lean mass loss ratio. Semaglutide was 39% and tirzepatide was 25%.
Kind of bad news for those hoping that glucagon is beneficial for muscle retention.
You're talking about a population that matches me.They take some big lazy fatty, give them a series of injections, and then take measurements after a month or two of sitting on their ass. Not helpful at all.
