Retatrutide 30mg

Identical compound, identical CAS, three lots with three separate reports. The price differences are packaging economics, not quality tiers, and they are large enough to be worth doing the arithmetic on. 10 mg — $90.00 per vial · $9.00/mg · 30 mg costs $270.00 as three vials 20 mg — $140.00 per vial · $7.00/mg · 30 mg costs $230.00 as a 20 mg plus a 10 mg 30 mg — this page — $180.00 per vial · $6.00/mg · 30 mg costs $180.00 as one vial That is a 33% lower price per milligram than the 10 mg vial, and 14% lower than the 20 mg. Filling, sealing, lyophilisation, the assay and the shipment cost roughly the same whether a vial holds 10 mg or 30 mg, so the fixed costs spread across three times the material. That is the entire explanation. There is no different supply chain, no different synthesis and no different grade behind it. And the pricing is on label weight, not measured content. This lot measured 34.20 mg against a 30 mg label, which works out to about $5.26 per milligram of peptide actually present — but we quote $6.00 because that is the number we can stand behind for the next lot as well. Pricing off an overfill figure would mean quoting a different price every time a batch is retested. One lot across a whole study is the real argument, not the money. If a dose-ranging series, a multi-arm comparison or a cross-site replication draws all its material from one vial, batch-to-batch variance is eliminated as a source of between-condition difference. Splitting the same work across three vials from three different lots introduces a confounder that no statistical correction can remove after the fact. That is worth more than $90.00 in most designs.

Three practical things, and one of them is the reason a bigger vial is sometimes the wrong purchase. 1. Concentration arithmetic changes, not the chemistry. Three times the mass in the same container means that reconstituting to the same volume gives three times the stock concentration. Solubility is not the limiting factor for a peptide of this class at ordinary laboratory working concentrations, but the number on your calculation sheet is different and it is a classic place for an order-of-magnitude error to enter a protocol. Recalculate from the label weight — 30 mg — rather than from a remembered figure for a 10 mg vial, and record which vial size a stock came from. 2. Aliquoting stops being optional. With 10 mg in a vial, a careless freeze-thaw cycle costs a little material. With 30 mg, it can cost a whole study's supply. Divide into single-use aliquots at the first preparation, before anything goes into the freezer, so that no working volume is ever thawed twice; do not return thawed material. This is the single largest avoidable loss in peptide work and a larger vial magnifies it. 3. Surface losses scale with handling, not with mass. Retatrutide carries a twenty-carbon fatty diacid, which makes the molecule surface-active: it adsorbs to glass and plastic and aggregates at air-liquid interfaces. A larger vial usually means more transfer steps, more dilutions and more containers, so the proportional loss to surfaces goes up even though the absolute amount of peptide is larger. Minimise transfers, avoid vigorous agitation, and prepare working dilutions immediately before use. This is structural reasoning from the molecule rather than a conclusion from a published stability study on this compound, and we present it as such. And the case against. A 30 mg vial concentrates a project into one reconstitution event. If the work will run in short bursts across many months, lyophilised powder in three sealed vials is more stable than one reconstituted stock held in aliquots, and several 10 mg vials may deliver more usable peptide than one large one despite costing 50% more per milligram. Buy the size that matches the tempo of the work, not the size that wins the arithmetic.

Lot CS-re30-0718 was analysed by Janoshik Analytical, an independent third-party laboratory, under report #210575, dated 5 August 2026: purity 99.751% by HPLC, net peptide content 34.20 mg. The sample was submitted on a blind identity panel spanning semaglutide, tirzepatide and retatrutide, without telling the laboratory which of the three it was, and the laboratory identified it as retatrutide. Why blinding matters here. In an ordinary assay the vendor names the compound and the laboratory reports purity against that named target. The purity figure is independent; the identity claim is not — it came from the submission form. On a blind panel the laboratory has to establish identity first, so its conclusion is generated evidence rather than confirmed input. The realistic adulteration risk with this family is not an obviously wrong powder but a cheaper, closely related acylated peptide sold as the expensive one, and that is exactly the failure a blind panel is designed to catch. It is not an accreditation, it is not a pharmacopoeial identity test, and it does not carry forward to the next lot. Testides confirmation on this lot is pending. Four lots in our catalogue hold a Testides (Toronto) certificate — Tirzepatide 10mg at 99.65%, Retatrutide 10mg at 99.68%, BPC-157 10mg at 99.64% and the Wolverine Blend at 98.64% combined. This is not one of them, and we do not describe it as though it were. The Janoshik result stands in the meantime and is labelled as such, as it is for every other pending lot on the lab results page. We publish Janoshik report numbers rather than Janoshik certificate links, so pending lots read identically across the site. Now the overfill. 34.20 mg against a 30 mg label is not an error and it is not generosity. Lyophilisation and filling lose material — to vial walls, to the stopper, to fill tolerance, to residue that never leaves the container. Filling to exactly the label weight would guarantee that a real fraction of vials came in under label. Filling above it does not. All three of our retatrutide lots measured above label: 11.88 mg against 10, 24.51 mg against 20, 34.20 mg against 30. Content is not purity, and the two must not be combined. Net peptide content is a quantitative mass determination: how many milligrams of retatrutide are in this container. Purity is an area-percent ratio from the chromatogram: of the peptide-related material present, what proportion is the target. A vial can be 99.8% pure and short-filled, or generously filled and 90% pure. You need both figures, from the same lot, with the lot number matching the vial label. Presenting a favourable overfill as evidence of quality is a category error. Full walkthrough: how to read a peptide COA.

Retatrutide is a single molecule, not a blend of three. One 39-residue chain activates the GIP receptor, the GLP-1 receptor and the glucagon receptor — three class-B1 G-protein-coupled receptors that all couple through G s to raise cAMP. That shared architecture is what makes a chimeric ligand chemically possible: the three native hormones belong to the same secretin/glucagon peptide family. The sequence shows the design. Residue 1 is tyrosine, as in native GIP; native GLP-1 and glucagon both start with histidine. Residue 3 is glutamine, as in glucagon, where GIP and GLP-1 carry glutamate. Positions 5–12 read Thr-Phe-Thr-Ser-Asp-Tyr-Ser-Ile — glucagon's motif with GIP's isoleucine at 12. The N-terminal half, which is the part that inserts into the receptor's transmembrane core and drives activation, is a deliberate chimera of GIP and glucagon elements. Three non-natural residues do the engineering. α-Aminoisobutyric acid at position 2 blocks dipeptidyl peptidase-4, the enzyme that otherwise clips the N-terminus of incretin peptides within minutes. A second Aib at 20 and an α-methyl-leucine at 13 are conformational constraints that hold the helix the receptors need to see. The C20 fatty diacid on Lys17, attached through a γ-glutamate and two AEEA spacers, binds serum albumin reversibly — and that is why the phase 1b terminal half-life came out at roughly six days (Urva et al., Lancet 2022;400(10366):1869-1881, PMID 36354040) rather than the minutes an unmodified incretin peptide would give. For a reagent, that long albumin-bound residence is itself a property worth modelling, and it is the reason retatrutide is a useful probe in albumin-binding and lipidated-peptide pharmacokinetic method work. The structures have been solved. Li et al. ( Cell Discov 2024;10(1):77, PMID 39019866) reported cryo-EM structures of retatrutide bound to all three receptors. The peptide forms a single continuous helix penetrating the transmembrane core, residues 1–13 in the pocket, the C-terminal region against the extracellular domain. Conserved contacts do the shared work — a salt bridge from the N-terminal tyrosine, aromatic stacking, hydrophobic contacts at Tyr10 and αMeLeu13 — while each receptor accommodates differently: GIPR's first extracellular loop carries three prolines and stays flexible enough to reposition the peptide, GLP-1R adds salt bridges including one to Lys17, and GCGR's seventh transmembrane helix shifts outward by about 4.6 Å. It is deliberately unbalanced. Against each native hormone at its own receptor, the same work reports retatrutide at roughly 8.9-fold greater potency at GIPR but about 0.3-fold and 0.4-fold at GCGR and GLP-1R. This is a GIPR-leading triple agonist, not an equipotent one. Any assay normalised solely to a GLP-1R readout will understate what it does. Discovery and preclinical pharmacology: Coskun et al. ( Cell Metab 2022;34(9):1234-1247.e9, PMID 35985340).

Because the third receptor is not more of the same. It acts on the other side of the energy-balance equation, and that is the whole reason the molecule was built. GIPR and GLP-1R are the intake arms. GLP-1 receptor agonism suppresses food intake centrally, slows gastric emptying and potentiates glucose-dependent insulin secretion; GIP receptor agonism is also insulinotropic and adds further central effects on intake and on nausea tolerability. Combined, they reduce energy in. That pairing is what tirzepatide does, and it is why the dual agonist's effects and adverse events alike are dominated by appetite and gastrointestinal phenomena. GCGR is the expenditure arm. Glucagon receptor agonism acts principally on the hepatocyte: lipolysis, hepatic fatty-acid oxidation, substrate mobilisation, raised resting energy expenditure, and a direct reduction in hepatic triglyceride content rather than one mediated only by weight change. It also raises hepatic glucose output, which is why glucagon spent decades classified as the hormone to block in diabetes rather than the one to agonise. The reappraisal is reviewed in Elmendorf et al. ( Pharmacol Res 2026;223:108077, PMID 41478576). The design bet, stated plainly. The two incretin arms are glucose-lowering; the glucagon arm is glucose-raising; putting all three on one molecule fixes the ratio between them and stakes everything on that ratio being right. It has a real failure mode, and the diabetes data are therefore a safety readout as much as an efficacy one. In the phase 2 diabetes trial the balance held — HbA1c was measured across escalation arms at 24 weeks in 281 adults against placebo and dulaglutide, with no severe hypoglycaemia reported (Rosenstock et al., Lancet 2023;402(10401):529-544, PMID 37385280) — and it held again in phase 3 (Bajaj et al., Lancet 2026;407(10546):2402-2413, PMID 42250575). Liver fat is where the third arm is most visible. In 98 participants with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, relative liver fat was measured against placebo at 24 weeks across escalation arms (Sanyal et al., Nat Med 2024;30(7):2037-2048, PMID 38858523). The authors note the effect tracked with weight and abdominal fat change, so this is not a clean isolation of glucagon-receptor action — which is precisely why running retatrutide head to head against tirzepatide and semaglutide is the design that separates the arms. Enough material from one lot to run all three arms of that comparison is the practical argument for this vial size.

TRIUMPH is the phase 3 obesity programme; TRANSCEND is the phase 3 diabetes and kidney programme. Between them they are the largest body of human data on any compound sold as a research peptide, and as of September 2026 most of it exists as sponsor announcements rather than peer-reviewed papers. The distinction is marked below. TRIUMPH-1 (NCT05929066) — reported 21 May 2026. 2,339 randomised, 80 weeks, escalating weekly doses against placebo, with a pre-specified extension to 104 weeks in 532 participants. Mean weight change was reported by the sponsor under both the efficacy and the treatment-regimen estimands. Sponsor press release, not peer-reviewed. TRIUMPH-2 (NCT05929079) and TRIUMPH-3 (NCT05882045) — reported 23 July 2026. TRIUMPH-2 enrolled 1,152 adults with type 2 diabetes and obesity or overweight over 80 weeks, measuring body weight and HbA1c. TRIUMPH-3 enrolled 1,949 adults with severe obesity and established cardiovascular disease, measuring body weight. Sponsor press releases, not peer-reviewed. TRIUMPH-4 (NCT05931367) — reported 11 December 2025. 445 adults with obesity and knee osteoarthritis, 68 weeks, against placebo, measuring body weight and the WOMAC pain score. Sponsor press release, not peer-reviewed. TRANSCEND-T2D-1 (NCT06354660) — peer-reviewed. Bajaj HS, et al., Lancet 2026;407(10546):2402-2413, PMID 42250575. Phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, 537 participants across 48 sites in the USA, Mexico and India, 40 weeks, measuring HbA1c and body weight against placebo. Two deaths were reported in one treatment arm, described by the investigators as unrelated to study drug. This is the first phase 3 retatrutide result to survive peer review, and it is the one to cite. TRANSCEND-CKD — running, with rationale, design and baseline characteristics published (Heerspink HJL, et al., Nephrol Dial Transplant 2026;41(6):1058-1068, PMID 41160422). No results reported. Regulatory consequence. Alongside the 23 July 2026 announcement the sponsor stated that it plans to submit retatrutide to the FDA in the first quarter of 2027. That is a stated intention, not a filing and certainly not an approval. Nothing about it changes the status of this vial today.

Every endpoint published is a surrogate. Weight, HbA1c, liver fat fraction, blood pressure, lipids, WOMAC pain score. There is no completed cardiovascular outcome trial, no renal outcome trial and no mortality data. TRIUMPH-3 recruited a population with established cardiovascular disease and still reported weight and tolerability rather than events, so even that trial does not close the gap. Nothing in the record supports a claim about long-term benefit. Longest reported exposure is 80 weeks, extended to 104 weeks in a subset of TRIUMPH-1. No multi-year safety data, no pregnancy data, no paediatric data, no data in significant hepatic or renal impairment outside the CKD trial now running. Heart rate rises. In the phase 2 obesity trial the increase was dose-related, peaked at 24 weeks and then declined. A 2026 network meta-analysis restricted to non-diabetic people with overweight or obesity puts retatrutide at +3.46 beats per minute (95% CI 1.74 to 5.18) — against semaglutide +3.35, tirzepatide +2.05, orforglipron +7.30 (Zhang et al., Eur J Med Res 2026;31(1):318). Blood pressure and lipid fractions were also pooled in that literature, with no significant HDL-C effect reported (Simental-Mendía et al., High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 2026;33(5):503-516, PMID 42371360). What a persistent chronotropic effect means over years is unresolved. Tolerability is dose-limiting at the higher doses studied. TRIUMPH-1 sponsor figures: nausea 28.6–42.4% against 14.8% on placebo, diarrhoea 25.2–34.1% against 13.5%, constipation 23.8–26.1% against 10.9%, vomiting 10.6–25.3% against 4.8%. Discontinuation for adverse events 4.1%, 6.9% and 11.3% against 4.9%, reaching 18.2% on the top dose in TRIUMPH-4. Two unexplained signals deserve naming: dysesthesia, 5.1–12.5% in TRIUMPH-1 and up to 20.9% in TRIUMPH-4 against under 1% on placebo, and a urinary tract infection imbalance, 7.5–8.8% against 5.3%, now the subject of published commentary in the European literature. Neither has a mechanism attached to it. Discontinuation has not been studied for retatrutide at all. We could find no randomised-withdrawal or off-treatment follow-up for this compound and will not manufacture one by analogy. Two class datasets are the nearest available evidence and both point one way. STEP 1's extension followed participants to week 120 after semaglutide withdrawal and recorded regain of weight lost, against placebo (Wilding et al., Diabetes Obes Metab 2022;24(8):1553-1564, PMID 35441470). SURMOUNT-4 randomised participants after 36 weeks of tirzepatide and followed both arms to week 88 (Aronne et al., JAMA 2024;331(1):38-48, PMID 38078870). Neither is retatrutide, and a persistence question needs its own off-treatment arm. One item we could not verify and therefore do not summarise. The BMJ published a fact-check in 2026 headed “Retatrutide fact check: Has a man died after taking the unapproved weight loss jab?” (Mahase E, BMJ 2026;394:e100245, PMID 42425580). We could not obtain the full text and we will not paraphrase a conclusion we have not read. The citation is real and verifiable; what it concludes, we leave to the source. That a general medical journal thought the question worth fact-checking is itself the relevant point for anyone reading a page like this one.

No. Retatrutide is approved nowhere in the world, as of September 2026. No Health Canada authorisation and no Drug Identification Number — no retatrutide product has ever been authorised for sale in Canada, so there is no DIN history to report. No FDA approval. No EMA approval. The developer describes it as investigational. Health Canada names retatrutide explicitly. The public advisory of 9 April 2026, “Think twice before injecting peptides bought online: unauthorized products can seriously harm you”, identification number RA-81874, lists retatrutide alongside BPC-157, CJC-1295, DSIP, Epitalon, GHK-Cu, hCG, ipamorelin, KPV, melanotan I and II, MOTS-c, NAD+, SS-31 and TB-500. Health Canada states these products have not been assessed for safety, efficacy or quality and that they are illegal in Canada; names hormonal imbalance, blood-sugar disturbance, liver or kidney damage, blood clots and tumour growth among the risks, together with the possibility of inconsistent ingredients or contaminants; and states directly that labelling a product “For Research Use Only” does not make it legal. A vendor that hides the regulator's own wording is telling you something about itself, so we print it. What we sell here is a laboratory reagent, and we sell it for no other purpose. Note also the limit of our own evidence: the blind panel settles whether the contents match the label and settles nothing else. Purity does not migrate into the safety column, and 99.751% of an unreviewed compound is still an unreviewed compound. No Canadian timeline exists. The sponsor has stated a plan to submit to the FDA in the first quarter of 2027. We could not verify any announced Health Canada submission date and will not invent one. A United States filing is not a Canadian filing, a filing is not an approval, and stated timelines move. WADA. Retatrutide is not named on the WADA Prohibited List, and neither GLP-1 nor glucagon receptor agonists appear there as a prohibited class. WADA placed this drug class on its Monitoring Program instead — semaglutide from 2024, tirzepatide from 2025 — and confirmed in September 2026 that these agents remain off the Prohibited List for 2027 while studies on performance effects continue. We could not verify that retatrutide is named individually on the Monitoring Program, so we do not claim that it is. Monitoring is not permission, and the list is revised every year.

One compound, three lots, three kinds of evidence and three price points. Choose on what the work needs rather than on the headline number. 30mg — $180.00, $6.00/mg — this page Lot CS-re30-0718, 99.751%, 34.20 mg measured, Janoshik #210575, blind tested. The lowest per-milligram cost in the catalogue and enough material to run a full dose-ranging series, a multi-arm comparison or a cross-site replication from one lot. Choose it when eliminating batch variance across conditions matters, or when the project is large enough that three smaller vials would mean three different lot numbers in the methods section. 20mg — $140.00, $7.00/mg Lot CS-re20-0710, 99.643%, 24.51 mg measured, Janoshik #207689, also blind tested. The middle option: more than one small vial's worth of material without committing to the largest, at a 22% saving per milligram against the 10mg. Choose it when the work needs a second and third run but not a full series. 10mg — $90.00, $9.00/mg Lot RETA-0626-01, 99.68%, 11.88 mg measured — the only retatrutide lot holding a Testides (Toronto) certificate, HPLC-UV at 214 nm with mass-spec identity confirmation, reported 2 July 2026 and published openly with the lot number. Highest per-milligram cost, smallest commitment. Choose it for a first characterisation, for method development, or when documentation from a named Canadian laboratory is what the paperwork requires. The honest counter-argument to buying the biggest vial is repeated above and repeated here because it is the one vendors never make: lyophilised powder in a sealed vial is the stable form, and a large vial concentrates a project into a single reconstitution whose aliquots then age. Work spread thinly across many months is often better served by several small vials, whatever the per-milligram arithmetic says.

Sealed, desiccated and lyophilised: −20 °C for long-term holding, 2–8 °C for short-term, protected from light. A sealed vial tolerates ambient shipping temperatures across the transit period without measurable loss; the cold requirement applies to holding, not to the journey. Why the convention is conservative here. A licensed peptide drug product is a formulation — buffer, bulking agent, sometimes a surfactant — with a stability programme and a defined shelf life behind it. This is neat peptide with no excipient and no shelf-life study. Nothing in the vial is protecting the molecule from moisture uptake, oxidation or interfacial stress, so the default is the cold, dry, dark one. What the structure tells you to worry about. Retatrutide has no methionine and no cysteine, so methionine oxidation and disulfide scrambling do not apply. It does carry aspartate and asparagine-adjacent positions where deamidation and isomerisation are the usual degradation route for peptides of this family, and a long C20 fatty diacid that makes it surface-active — so adsorption to glass and plastic and aggregation at air-liquid interfaces are the realistic losses. Keep transfers few and agitation gentle. These are inferences from the structure, not findings from a published stability study on retatrutide, and we offer them as reasoning rather than as data. The 30 mg-specific point: aliquot before freezing, without exception. The larger the vial, the larger the fraction of a project riding on one reconstitution. Divide into single-use aliquots at first preparation so that no working volume is thawed twice, label each with the lot number CS-re30-0718 so the material stays traceable to its report, and do not return thawed material to the freezer. If only part of the vial is needed now, the rest is safest left lyophilised and sealed rather than reconstituted and stored in solution. We stock bacteriostatic water 10ml and 3ml for laboratory reconstitution. No in-solution stability figure appears anywhere on this page. We searched for a published study of reconstituted retatrutide at any concentration, buffer or temperature and found none we could verify, so there is no number here to quote — and a supplier who does quote one is quoting something unmeasured.

Delivery is free and tracked, Canada-wide, on every order, with no minimum — the same on a single vial as on a large order, because there is no threshold to reach. Orders are dispatched within 48 hours, Monday to Friday, from our facility in British Columbia. The vial is already in Canada, so there is no international leg, no customs clearance and no brokerage fee. Vials leave sealed with the lot number printed on the label, so CS-re30-0718 can be matched against the published report before anything is opened. Tracking is issued at dispatch. Current transit estimates are on our shipping page.

Report damage in transit or non-delivery to info@thepeptide.ca within 48 hours of the expected delivery date, with photographs of the packaging and vial where applicable, and we will resolve it. Sealed, unopened vials are exchangeable within 14 days of delivery. There are no refunds or exchanges on product that has been opened, reconstituted or otherwise prepared: once a seal is broken we cannot verify handling history, and a reagent of unknown temperature and light exposure is not one we will put back into circulation. That applies to a 30 mg vial exactly as it does to a 10 mg one — the value of the vial does not change the reasoning. Full terms: refund policy.

Coskun T, et al. Cell Metab. 2022;34(9):1234-1247.e9. PMID 35985340 — discovery and preclinical characterisation of LY3437943 as a triple GCGR/GIPR/GLP-1R agonist, with phase 1 single-ascending-dose safety. Start here for the pharmacology. Urva S, et al. Lancet. 2022;400(10366):1869-1881. PMID 36354040 — phase 1b multiple-ascending-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled, n=72 with type 2 diabetes. Terminal half-life ≈6 days; placebo-adjusted body-weight change was among the endpoints measured. NCT04143802. Jastreboff AM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(6):514-526. PMID 37366315 — phase 2 obesity trial, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, n=338, 48 weeks, measuring body-weight change against placebo across escalation arms. NCT04881760. Rosenstock J, et al. Lancet. 2023;402(10401):529-544. PMID 37385280 — phase 2 in type 2 diabetes, randomised, double-blind, placebo- and dulaglutide-controlled, n=281 across 42 US centres, measuring HbA1c and body weight at 24 weeks. Sanyal AJ, et al. Nat Med. 2024;30(7):2037-2048. PMID 38858523 — phase 2a in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, n=98, measuring relative liver fat at 24 weeks against placebo. Li W, Zhou Q, Cong Z, et al. Cell Discov. 2024;10(1):77. PMID 39019866 — cryo-EM structures of retatrutide at GLP-1R, GIPR and GCGR; 8.9-fold greater potency at GIPR, 0.3- and 0.4-fold at GCGR and GLP-1R relative to the native hormones. Coskun T, et al. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2025;13(8):674-684. PMID 40609566 — body-composition substudy of the phase 2 type 2 diabetes trial. Bajaj HS, et al. Lancet. 2026;407(10546):2402-2413. PMID 42250575 — TRANSCEND-T2D-1, the first peer-reviewed phase 3 result. n=537, 40 weeks, 48 sites, measuring HbA1c and body weight against placebo. NCT06354660. Heerspink HJL, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2026;41(6):1058-1068. PMID 41160422 — TRANSCEND-CKD rationale, design and baseline characteristics. Results not yet reported. Simental-Mendía LE, et al. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2026;33(5):503-516. PMID 42371360 — systematic review and meta-analysis of retatrutide RCTs pooling blood-pressure and lipid endpoints; no significant HDL-C effect reported. Elmendorf AJ, et al. Pharmacol Res. 2026;223:108077. PMID 41478576 — IUPHAR review on repurposing glucagon agonism for obesity and type 2 diabetes; background for why a glucagon receptor arm is on the molecule at all.