Forum › Results & Progress

Giving up on Reta

55 replies34 peopleAug 5, 2026☆ Follow
Summary

Why would Retatrutide produce zero weight loss or appetite suppression at high doses after Semaglutide worked well, despite heavy exercise and very low calories?

The original poster switched from Sema (where 1 mg weekly produced 25 lb loss) to Reta and saw nothing at 12 mg weekly split dosing after eight weeks, only skin sensations, so they started Tirz instead. Readers mostly doubt the calorie numbers are accurate given the person's size and rowing routine, suggest checking reconstitution or getting bloodwork for hormones, and note that some people simply respond poorly to certain GLP agonists. A few mention possible individual differences in baseline GIP or GLP-1 levels that could explain why Sema worked but Reta did not.

What this discussion establishesWhere people disagree

Whether the poster is under-counting calories or truly experiencing no effect from Reta

Still open

Whether hormone or metabolic testing would identify a specific cause

Nothing here is advice.

55 replies · 34 people · page 1 of 2
BlueBeacon50archiveopening postAug 5

I started Reta eight weeks ago and worked up to 4 mg three times a week but lost nothing, so I'm done with it. I had switched over from Sema where 1 mg once a week dropped me 25 pounds in eight weeks. Right away Reta lacked the appetite control Sema gave me. I kept increasing the dose each week hoping for a change that never showed up. I did get the skin burning sensations though, and energy stayed decent, but the scale never moved. Tried three different batches and they all felt identical. Maybe I'm just someone who doesn't respond to this one, which is frustrating. For context I'm 53, 201 pounds, 6'3, row six nights a week for at least 30 minutes or 6500 meters, and stay under 1500 calories daily. Now I'm moving to Tirz and tapering off Reta. Has anyone else had this kind of experience? It doesn't match almost everything else posted here.

ClearWillow37archiveAug 5

You said 4 mg three times a week at only eight weeks in? Do you have any GLP-1 receptors left? That's like using dynamite to fish and then wondering why nothing is biting. Plus you're 6'3 at 200 pounds, rowing six nights a week, and eating like a small woman? Something doesn't add up. Are you serious?

QuietThistle70archiveAug 5

Not arguing with what you went through, but if the calorie numbers are correct then your metabolism is an extreme outlier. Staying at 1500 calories with your size and activity level and seeing no loss points to a very low BMR. If it were me I'd get hormone and metabolic bloodwork done to check for anything fixable. What were you eating when you were losing on Sema? Are you type 2 diabetic on insulin? Still, there are definitely low responders to Reta and you might be one.

BlueBeacon50archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @ClearWillow37

4 mg every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for two weeks. I wasn't planning to go any higher so that's why I stopped. Never noticed side effects beyond the skin burning sensation. Sema I could feel within minutes of injecting.

PatientThistle47archiveAug 5

Doing 4 mg three times a week and feeling nothing is wild. I think the batch you had was bad. Switch your diet to low carb or keto, that helps a lot. With keto alone I dropped 18 kg in three months a couple years back before the big pandemic and never felt hungry. This time I needed help getting into ketosis so I started Mounjaro at 2.5 mg from my doctor and after three months I'm down about 20 kg. The first four weeks were rough with nausea and constipation. Change your diet. You can also add 5-HTP from Amazon to cut hunger and improve mood. Walk every day, start with 2-3 km relaxed. Throw out sugar and anything with more than one ingredient. Clean eating without sugar makes a huge difference. I still drink daily but it still works. Basically you need to shift your mindset. The drugs

SlowAlder89archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50 (opening post)

At 6'3 and 201 pounds with that activity level and 1500 calories, you should already be losing weight with or without Reta. If you're not then something metabolic is off. Get your hormones checked and see a doctor.

GreyLantern40archiveAug 5

Maybe a dumb idea, but how sure are you about your reconstitution? Your results would make sense if you were actually taking 1.2 mg a week instead of 12 mg for example.

BrightCompass57archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @SlowAlder89

Sorry to be direct but the math is off. 1500 calories is starvation level. If those numbers are right then your hormones are seriously messed up. I doubt you're really eating 1500 calories and not losing even with metabolic problems. Start with full bloodwork. Reta is the best compound I've ever used and I've tried some strong stuff.

ClearHarbour45archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50 (opening post)

It seems like your weight is perfect for sports performance, and competitors enjoy using that medication. I don't understand why it hasn't kicked in fully after eight weeks, especially since you're also restricting calories. That drug hasn't impressed me much either. Adding it to the other one only brought me six more pounds of reduction, and that happened twelve months back. I increased my aerobic activity slightly and did some round-robin workouts at the facility five days weekly, but saw zero change. I stopped drinking from Monday through Friday after having several each evening before, yet nothing happened. Out of irritation I took a larger dose of one shortly after the other and dropped two pounds following seven weeks with no movement. In my case it appears nothing continues to function beyond a year and a half, so my system refuses to be tricked once more, like in that old comedy film.

ClearLantern70archiveAug 5

1 mg of Sema works for you but 12 mg of Reta does nothing. That makes no sense at all. Test your stuff, check reconstitution, and let us know.

GreenWillow54archiveAug 5

You got bad Reta, that's why. You're also probably under-counting calories badly. Weigh everything on a good scale including sauces and condiments. Skip the AI calorie estimators, they aren't accurate. Use the labels instead.

BlueBeacon50archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @GreenWillow54

Two friends are using the same batch and getting good results. I also tried three different sources hoping for a change. Did 2.5 mg of Tirz and felt it immediately. I think Reta might just be ineffective for a small percentage of people. It simply doesn't work on me. I could inject 6 mg and feel nothing except the skin tingle. Glad it works for others but I was hoping to find someone else with the same outcome.

WarmMeadow92archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50 (opening post)

All Reta did for me was cause the worst constipation I've had in years. Honestly I didn't give it a real try since I was stacking it. I liked how Sema felt and it worked well stacked with Tirzepatide. Why not just stay on Sema?

ClearLantern70archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50

Sounds like you got very unlucky. Maybe try Tirz?

SlowLedger42archiveAug 5

LOL, would you say the same thing about gyms? It would be like: I got my bench up to a certain weight at gym A. Switched to gym B for a month and still can't bench more. Gym B sucks.

BrightSparrow36archiveAug 5

Even if the Reta was bad, with the workout routine and 1500 calories daily you should still be losing weight with or without any meds. The chance of having a metabolic condition that lets you train hard and hold weight on 1500 calories is way lower than overestimating exercise or underestimating food intake.

BlueBeacon50archiveAug 5

Thanks to everyone who gave real thoughts. The flood of dumb comments isn't helpful. I don't understand it either and that's why I asked. If I wanted smartass replies I could just watch the news you miserable twats.

ClearHarbour45archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BrightSparrow36

Good point. Wouldn't he need over 2000 calories even at a completely sedentary level?

PatientQuill81archiveAug 5

Maybe take a couple months off and let your system clear. 12 mg of Reta with no weight loss after eight weeks seems extreme. I reached 12 mg once a week following the trial schedule and stopped losing. Sema did nothing for me two years earlier at the full dose. I've since dropped Reta to 6 mg and added some Cagri and I'm losing slowly now, which is fine as long as I don't regain.

QuietThistle70archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50

You have to admit that not losing on 1500 calories a day at 6'3 201 pounds while exercising is pretty remarkable. Adding that you titrated to 12 mg a week of Reta in eight weeks with almost no effects is also remarkable. Just saying. I'm about your size, weight, and activity level and ten years older. If I tried 12 mg of Reta cold after 20 months on GLP-1s I wouldn't be surprised to end up in the ER. If I tried staying at 1500 calories long term I'd look like I lived in a concentration camp.

BrightCompass57archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50

I didn't see any smartass comments. You're not eating the calories you say you are. That's just not how it works. If you want to take responsibility and fix it there's a path forward. Until you own that part you won't get the results you want.

PlainAlder11archiveAug 5
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50

Show me one, I didn't see any. I'm out of here and you're on ignore after that comment. No help from me now.

GreyFenwick31archiveAug 6

Perhaps the items you received weren't up to par?

ClearBeacon24archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50 (opening post)

Sema is stronger because it only targets GLP while the others don't give the same hunger suppression.

ClearLantern70archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @BlueBeacon50

If you feel this way you can just ignore those people. I was actually trying to help. Now I'm walking away. Good luck, I really mean that.

PatientHarbour61archiveAug 6

There was a recent study suggesting people who respond well to Tirzepatide differ from those who respond well to Semaglutide. Patients with low baseline GLP-1 levels responded strongly to Sema while those with low baseline GIP responded well to Tirz. People with both only did well on Tirz. Reta is probably similar and closer to Tirzepatide. If that's accurate you might be in the area where strong Sema responders do poorly on Tirz and maybe Reta too. I've started suggesting that people struggling on Tirz or Reta try Sema instead.

CopperSignal27archiveAug 6

I was thinking of mentioning how that research applies here. Around five to ten percent of individuals see almost no reduction from these medications. Assuming your version works fine, perhaps you're among the few who don't get much effect, and similar results might occur with alternatives too, though semaglutide worked for you earlier. The research points to responding mostly through one pathway rather than the others, making semaglutide potentially preferable over tirzepatide in such cases, even if the latter usually outperforms for everyone else. It's tough to square the lack of progress given your current size, activity level, and intake. Major prior loss or extended restriction would explain adaptation better. The straightforward reason is that tracking intake often misses the mark for most, which isn't a judgment but common. Double-checking measurements and logging everything could reveal discrepancies. Diabetes might slow things slightly, yet some drop should still happen under those conditions. Low daily burn seems unlikely too. We don't know much yet about whether non-responders improve with amylin types, though future data could clarify, so that option could be one to look at.

LevelAlder29archiveAug 6

Sorry Reta isn't working for you. Since you feel Tirz right away, any reason not to stick with that? With your calories and activity the lack of loss could point to a metabolic disorder. A nutritionist can test metabolism with an indirect calorimeter and bloodwork can fill in the rest. It's possible you're describing intake and exercise accurately but have a condition that makes loss very hard. There have been studies where different racial groups followed the same diet and some lost less due to genetic factors from ancestral survival traits. Metabolisms are strange.

WarmSparrow92archiveAug 6

Your TDEE is around 2800 calories a day. At 1500 calories daily even without Reta you should be dropping a lot of weight every week. If you can't track calories accurately are you sure you're reconstituting Reta correctly? At least read the basic guides and tutorials first.

GreenBramble30archiveAug 6

Let's be realistic. You're probably not tracking calories correctly or your dose. I doubt you're actually taking 12 mg a week but even if you are you're definitely not in a calorie deficit and your counting is off. It's true your metabolism could be very slow and burn fewer calories but that also means less body function overall. It's like running a car in eco mode. Energy would be low, brain fog would be bad, and you'd be sleepy all day. You would know your body is in eco mode and wouldn't be rowing multiple times a week.

KeenCinder20archiveAug 6

Why do people expect this to make them lose 100 pounds in a month? You went up too fast. I started at 1 mg then moved to 2 mg the second month. So far 25 pounds lost in two months. People need more patience with these things.

QuietPebble46archiveAug 6

This was an interesting read and OP I didn't see any smartass comments. I read a lot of confused people questioning how you're defying thermodynamics. People want to help but you have to answer the key questions: are you tracking calories meticulously and correctly, and have you reconstituted your Reta correctly? The second question matters less if the first isn't solid, but both are worth checking.

WarmCompass44archiveAug 6

Someone insisting they consume just fifteen hundred calories daily while rowing on most days should drop pounds whether using that medication or any comparable ones. I think confirming intake by weighing portions accurately would clear things up. Biology makes it impossible for a two hundred pound person to hold steady on that amount or below.

BrightSignal40archiveAug 6

Sounds like a product quality issue. I agree with the others, get bloodwork done. I'm big on all of us peptide users checking bloods at least yearly.

WarmFenwick99archiveAug 6

It's surprising how many here jumped straight to labeling someone as foolish. From discussions I've followed lately, some folks show little reaction to certain options. One didn't deliver the same results for me as the other, which led me to switch back. Lots of others mention the cravings returning with that choice. It might help to look into whatever else someone is using or whether recent tests were done. Keeping track of intake is basic enough that it's odd to question it repeatedly. Better to give people the benefit of the doubt instead of dismissing them right away. These spots are meant for supporting each other. Now the individual might head off elsewhere, and learning the real details could have mattered. Yet the response has been insults plus claims that it can't occur. Nice work everyone.

SlowLedger42archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @PatientHarbour61

That was my first thought too but reading the original post more carefully I realized the poster seems to have responded just as well to Reta as to Sema, both maintained the same 25 plus pound loss. It's only the order they tried the drugs that made them think one worked and the other didn't. It's like clearing an infection with antibiotic A then taking antibiotic B because it was handy and then not realizing the reason B did nothing is because A had already cleared the infection. If the order had been reversed they would have thought B worked and A was the dud.

BrightCompass57archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @WarmFenwick99

Things are reversed in this situation. The calorie total provided by that individual doesn't match reality. Commenters are just calling out what's clear to everyone. Without any of those drugs involved, the reported intake and exercise would lead to huge drops on the scale. Highlighting the discrepancy is necessary if anyone wants to make progress.

QuietPebble46archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @WarmFenwick99

Your remark strikes me as harsher since it labels the original poster an unseeing foolish primate when with that calorie count plus the described movement level fat reduction would occur in any case so the reasoning fails to line up.

SlowLedger42archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @QuietPebble46

Ironically for those deep into the calorie counting world this isn't as far off as it could be. I'm not sure being blind or having intellectual disability changes daily energy needs but if a quick search is right then rhesus macaques and baboons both need well under 1500 calories a day. So if it turned out your accusation of the OP was true then 1500 calories a day would technically be a surplus in that case.

BrightSparrow36archiveAug 6

Like I noted earlier, a tall guy around two hundred pounds who hits the gym often is probably miscounting what he eats rather than requiring an unusually low amount under fifteen hundred calories. This comes from someone who is forty six, going through perimenopause, gets moderate exercise, and maintains on about sixteen hundred.

SharpCompass12archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @ClearHarbour45

Recently I brought that up with my kid who is now eighteen and he reacted as though I still connected to the web using prehistoric technology. Which was accurate but not relevant now. 😂

SlowLantern46archiveAug 6

This is not adding up. 12 mg a week 4 mg split dose, never heard of a three times split dose. Whatever you're putting in your body is not Reta.

PatientHarbour61archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @SlowLedger42

The reason I stepped back from that reading is because twelve milligrams of reta ought to deliver noticeably more impact than one milligram of sema when it comes to shedding pounds according to average study outcomes. Folks rightly flag that the original poster's food logs look unrealistic yet that mismatch alone shouldn't block progress at this point from appetite control by itself. Precise tracking of intake is helpful but not usually required to drop weight on these compounds. The higher reta amount should still drive visible change even with loose records yet it hasn't while the lower sema dose managed to work for them.

WarmCompass44archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @WarmFenwick99

No one's suggesting he's unintelligent here. Pause and consider the situation. This extends past that specific compound. Can a body weighing over two hundred pounds sustain itself for several months on fifteen hundred calories each day combined with frequent physical activity without any reduction in mass? Our goal is to identify the cause behind the original poster's stalled progress, and I'm confident he's seeking the same clarification. Claiming that tracking intake is simple overlooks how often we've witnessed individuals assert they log everything accurately only to experience no change. This issue contributed to the creation of these medications in the first place. Numerous users who thought their records were precise realized after starting treatment that errors had occurred in their logging process all along.

SlowLantern46archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @WarmCompass44

I feel the same way mostly. It baffles me how a guy with those measurements could intake just fifteen hundred calories, do so much running or biking, and yet not shed any body fat.

RustLantern55archiveAug 6

If you know you know.

SlowLedger42archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @PatientHarbour61

Generally speaking, the typical outcome holds true. Yet those overall figures often mask differences between people. The information comes from an additional set of results in a mid-stage trial for that medication following nearly a year. Notably, the original poster showed no return of lost pounds while using it. They appeared to assume that moving between these types of medications erases all prior progress, allowing a fresh beginning without accounting for how much they weighed at the very start, which strikes me as an amusing kind of wishful delusion.

PatientHarbour61archiveAug 6
↳ replying to @SlowLedger42

There are comparable graphs out there for sema too, though the studies on reta tend to use those waterfall displays that make things harder to interpret. The real puzzle here isn't whether the guy reacts strongly or weakly to these glp-1 meds, since we already see he gets some effect. What stands out instead is how he seems to get similar or even stronger results from the lower sema dose than from the much higher reta amount. Under the usual ranking where reta should outperform sema, that change ought to have produced a clearer improvement, yet the outcome runs the other way. Standard study results don't easily account for this pattern, but the paper mentioned offers a possible reason that certain people actually do better on sema than on tirz, and probably on reta as well. That lines up with the personal results being discussed and points toward looking at why responses vary so much from one person to the next, flipping the order we would normally predict.

Related discussions

Add your experience

If you have tried it, this topic is still open. Sign in to reply — it takes a minute.