Reta/Tirz random thought

BP_6

Member
I was thinking about this. With tirzepatide already selling so well and being so successful, why is the exact same company putting the resources into retatrutide? I can see all the other companies developing their own GLP versions, but I find it odd that Ely Lilly is putting in the development cost when they already have a very successful product.

Is it going to be marketed differently for a different purpose to a different customer? Like maybe people with MASH vs just people trying to lose weight? Just one of those things that you think about at night and it keeps you up. At least the way my brain works.
 
Note, sorry realized I posted this in the wrong section. Feel free to move it to the correct one.
 
Not sure, you raise a good point.

I know Reta doesn’t really kill your appetite, so that appeals to a lot of people. From a marketing standpoint, they can sell it as GLP-3. Which “sounds more powerful” than a GLP-2 or GLP-1.

The taxpayers pay for most of the cost of research and development. They really aren’t losing any money selling 2 similar products.
 
There is data to show that reta is uniquely effective at attacking fatty liver stores and has a more robust impact on lipids / blood sugar. If there's one thing the drug companies do better than anything, it's marketing. The real battle is between pharma and the insurers. I have severe OSA which Tirz is FDA approved to treat, but my insurer decided randomly that, hey fuck you, we're not paying for it unless you are diabetic. Did me a huge favor. Switched to reta which I personally prefer much more over Tirz.

If you look at the mental health drugs, the pharma companies have successfully marketed metabolites and isomers of previously approved drugs and done just fine marketing them to moronic prescribers.
 
Reta has its advantages compared to the other two, but it is a bit more expensive as well.
 
Back
Top