Reta hype is insane but I am cautiously optimistic — what worked for you?

Taking the question as asked, rather than the general version of it. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

labquiet_amy said:

The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. The glucagon component looks paradoxical and is not. Glucagon receptor agonism raises energy expenditure and drives hepatic fatty-acid oxidation, and its hyperglycaemic tendency is offset by the GLP-1 arm's insulin secretagogue effect. Net result: intake down from GLP-1/GIP, expenditure up from glucagon, glycaemia neutral or improved. It is a balancing act, and it is why the liver-fat results are the most interesting part of the dataset.

nick_SD_fit said:

Sceptical rather than excited about the triple agonist, and I would like somebody to talk me out of the scepticism with data rather than enthusiasm.

Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.