Dr.SurgeonPGH said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Dr.SurgeonPGH said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Holding longer is the underrated move. A step that is uncomfortable at week two is frequently comfortable at week six with no change in dose, because the gastric-emptying component tachyphylaxes while the appetite effect persists. Escalating at week two throws that adaptation away.
Worth separating that from the titration schedule, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Old thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from Dr.SurgeonPGH — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
sarah_TO said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.