[Results] 89 weeks on 1.7mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring
Here it is: 89 weeks on 1.7mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring. One person, one log, no control group, so read it accordingly.
89 weeks and 1.7mg. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour.
Weight change and appetite change are different endpoints on different timescales. Conflating them is where most of the confusion on this board starts.
STEP-1 ran 68 weeks and landed just under 15% mean body weight change on 2.4mg. It is an average of a wide distribution, not a target you have missed.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Retitled to match the body. The original promised a comparison the post does not make.
The weekly interval comes out of the half-life — roughly a week — so you are on a smooth curve rather than a series of spikes. That is also why moving your day slightly does very little.
Agreed, and the bit people skip is that the ladder is a tolerance ladder. It is not a potency ranking.
Are you measuring anything other than weight? Waist is usually the one that keeps moving.
Week 71: 12kg down, nausea basically gone since about week 3, and the honest headline is that nothing dramatic happened. It was boring and it worked.
dose day drift of a day either way is fine, the curve barely notices
[removed by moderator]
Same. I sat at 0.5mg for three months because it was working and there was nothing to fix.
protein first, then everything else gets easier
protein first, then everything else gets easier
Right, and the timescale is the bit that keeps getting lost. Judge a step at a month, not at a weekend.
Delayed gastric emptying is most pronounced early and attenuates with continued dosing, which is why the nausea usually fades at a stable dose.
Small correction: 2.4mg is the maintenance ceiling on the label, not the starting maintenance dose. The distinction matters for anyone reading this later.
That figure is the 68-week trial mean, not a weekly rate. Dividing it by the weeks gives you a number that does not mean anything.
Cosigning. The appetite change and the scale change ran about three weeks apart for me too.
Sat at 2.4mg for four months because it was doing the job. Everyone told me to go up. The one time I did, the only thing that changed was the injection-site soreness.
The escalation schedule in the trials existed to keep people on the drug. It is a tolerability ramp, and it is why the label reads the way it does.
Did protein intake change in the same window?
the first four weeks are a tolerance check, not a weight-loss phase
the scale is the least sensitive instrument you own
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use, so anything in this thread about how a compounded or research vial "should" behave is a chemistry discussion, not a dosing one.
My stall was eleven weeks. Eleven. Then it moved again without me changing anything at all.
Same injection day each week, or has it drifted?
How long was the stall before you decided it was a stall?
Careful. A four-week stall is inside normal variation and treating it as failure is how people escalate for no reason.
the appetite signal and the scale move on different clocks
Steady state after a dose change takes four to five half-lives, so the fair judgement point on a new step is about a month, not four days.
Not convinced. You changed the dose and the week at the same time, so you cannot attribute the change to either.
Yes — and the honest version is that most of the "it stopped working" posts turn out to be a normal fortnight of water weight.
Not convinced.
Adding one thing to this: the appetite effect and the scale run on separate clocks, so both halves can be true at once.
- 1Week 71: 12kg down, nausea basically gone since about week 3, and the honest…11 comments in this branch · started by u/hassan_ostergaard
- 2Did protein intake change in the same window?9 comments in this branch · started by u/chidi_demir