ArticleBMJ case reports2026
Emerging risks of health optimisation: refractory nausea associated with peptide injections reported to contain retatrutide.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A woman in her mid-20s presented with 5 days of persistent nausea, repeated vomiting, loose stools and markedly reduced oral intake. Blood tests, urinalysis, abdominal ultrasonography and cerebral MRI identified no alternative cause. Symptoms persisted despite intravenous fluids, metoclopramide, ondansetron and domperidone. Repeated, non-judgemental exposure history revealed 4 once-weekly, dose-escalated subcutaneous injections of an unverified product reported to contain retatrutide, an investigational triple glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptor agonist, administered in a wellness setting by a self-described life coach without medical qualification. She did not consider the injections to be medication. Symptoms improved 2 days after admission and resolved within 1 week. The Naranjo score (7) indicated probable causality. This case illustrates how pharmacologically active substances supplied through the wellness industry may evade routine medication history. Clinicians should ask explicitly about injections, peptides, research chemicals, online products and substances recommended by non-medical wellness practitioners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.