Okay who else cannot stop burping

SarahChen_PharmD said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

Agreed, though "tolerable" needs defining. A dose you tolerate by eating almost nothing is not tolerated, it is being paid for somewhere else — usually in lean mass, sometimes in adherence three months later.

GraceAZ_72 said:

Steady state is the thing most people miss.

That reframing is the part I needed. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

SarahChen_PharmD said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

I read this differently from SarahChen_PharmD, on substance rather than tone. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.

Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again.