#22

Do you have a reference/link to this study?

2 Likes
#23

Yea I’d like to see it too.

2 Likes
#24

Please see this. It is a bit long. If you start by examining figure 3A you’ll be in the right part of the study if I recall correctly. It has been some time since I read it slowly and carefully, I just scanned it now. Please let me know your thoughts once you’ve had a chance to digest it. Thanks.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2022.07.013

3 Likes
#25

Well sure. But they also take whatever research chemicals off the Internet. That doesn’t mean much, haha. I was a pretty active member of those communities for a decade or more.

I was going to ask you to share, then saw that you just did a few moments ago, thanks. I would gladly stand corrected because I wasn’t aware of any new evidence. I know the whole “GLP-1RA = muscle loss” thing is predicated mostly on obese people who don’t exercise, and I had presumed the effect could be negated by exercise. But of course the pharma companies work on the Activin A stuff because it would be a huge money-maker to be co-prescribed alongside every GLP1R1 prescription. The study you shared seems to be talking about a new drug, and not any of the drugs people are currently using, so I’m not sure how to interpret it.

3 Likes
#26

LY3437943 is retatrutide. I’ve seen anecdotal reports that it is a bit more muscle sparing compared to tirzepatide and semaglutide.

Most muscle loss is just improper use.

I’m sure they’re looking at a lot more than just myostatin and activin A. I say bring it on!

We need something to help with motor units as well, they seem to heavily rely on extensive exercise to maintain. But heavy exercise isn’t good for longevity.

3 Likes
#27

I actually misread @Thorin’s original post. Yes he’s right, the newer drugs (at least the ones that agonize receptors beyond just GLP-1) do definitely have effects beyond decreased caloric intake, especially those with glucagon activity (retatrutide, mazdutide, survodutide and others in development).

The glucagon agonism causes increased caloric expenditure, which is indeed independent of caloric intake and results in weight loss over and above what you’d see with GLP-1 and/or GIP agonism alone. Tirzepatide also causes a small increase in energy expenditure, although much less than the others with GCG agonism.

2 Likes
#28

I’ve been using Retatrutide for over a year now. It is not FDA approved yet so anyone using it is in a study or buying it from overseas peptide providers (which is what I’ve been doing). Many, many people are using it.

From what I have been able to find, I am not sure if Reta is more muscle sparing than Tirzepatide. I would like to know which is best on that measure but I have not come across anything convincing on it. Like you, I think Reta might be the best on that, but I am just not sure.

I am not saying the answer to that is not known by anyone, I am merely admitting it is not known by me. I would like to know.

3 Likes
#29

We’ll get some retatrutide DEXA body comp data when the first of the phase 3 trial data is released later this year. Can’t wait!

4 Likes
#30

That is exciting! I did not know that. Thank you for sharing.

1 Like
#31

I don’t know any lifters who can bench over 400 that are not taking PEDS.

2 Likes
#32

I have not found any research that investigates muscle preservation on reta. There is some speculation among users on Reddit that glucagon receptor activation might help preserve muscle mass by increasing energy expenditure and promoting fat breakdown. While this may not directly impact muscle, perhaps since reta achieves some of its fat loss via increased metabolism, the caloric deficit required for the same amount of fat loss is lower; therefore, muscle mass loss due to calorie restriction is also lower. Anyhow, I think the key is to have reasonable nutrition and protein intake and keep resistance training. I have not tried any GLP1s yet, but I’ve lost a few pounds of fat a week with calorie restriction while simultaneously gaining some muscle by following this formula.

3 Likes
#33

This one is on 2.0mg Reta weekly.

Our son Adam, 41y/o, 185lb, benches 285 for 5 reps, max 420, dead lifts 600, has extreme grip strength and can close the heaviest COC gripper .
https://ironmind.com/product-info/ironmind-grippers/captains-of-crush-grippers/

PXL_20250506_210022479

8 Likes
#34

That’s a very difficult feat.

3 Likes
#35

You don’t want him to grab you, that’s for sure! LoL!

His grandfather had crazy grip strength as well. Could pick up 1x 40kg bag of grain in each hand with his thumbs and forefingers and carry them a good distance. You did not want him to grab you by the ear! I’ve seen him walk up to cows, grab them by the nose and have complete control over them.

4 Likes
#36

This is literally my worst nightmare. Not everyone deserves to be jacked,

2 Likes
#37

Lmao. Let go of caring about it. I see bodybuilder guys get mad at GLP1 agonists as well.

1 Like
#38

Indeed, you don’t get jacked by losing weight. You still have to train hard and be disciplined to develop those muscles.

And it is kinda weird that this class of drugs brings that attitude when they use drugs like SARMs, SERMs, AIs, etc. How are GLP1 different?

5 Likes
#39

I take a GLP1 agonist and so do many other bodybuilders. Losing weight doesn’t take as long as it takes to build a lot of muscle. If everyone starts to look extremely jacked without going to the gym in two seconds, that’s going to have a lot of downstream consequences. I know everyone is going to compare the two but it’s really not an apples to apples comparison. They’re quite different.

2 Likes
#40

Can you explain what downstream consequences it will have? Is this some kind of argument that people who exercise to gain muscle have to go through adversity and there is benefit to that adversity? I don’t disagree with that, but there are benefits from people having muscle that will likely outweigh this.

Too many people are too far gone, but will have a second chance with these types of therapies. Also, bodybuilders will absolutely abuse the fk out of these let’s be real.

For the average person I predict it will give them a better self-image, and more energy. Likely it will increase how much they exercise from none to some, and this will carry some benefit also.

Part of the benefit of exercise is the body composition result, the other part is stimulation of the body through movement.

1 Like
#41

Sure, if these drugs are safe, I will use them if they exist. That being said, I’d rather no one be able to use them.

Let’s try to imagine a world where all men are jacked and what that would do to things like dating, marriages etc? it’s going to be a very different world. Imagine if the lazy skinny kid who smokes weed all day in his basement suddenly looks like a bodybuilder and is now able to date women out of his league. This may not sound important to some, but I think it really is. I still believe people should have to earn things in life. It’s like giving everyone in the world $10 million.

Not to mention, those of us who have grinded in the gym for decades would feel like we wasted our time if everyone else catches up to us in a matter of weeks thanks to a little pill. I think this would really change the world and not in a good way.

I hate to use the term that it would “reward laziness” because I don’t love when that term is used with GLP1’s but I think if you create a pill that would instantly make you really jacked, then that really would reward laziness.

2 Likes