[Discussion] discontinuation is doing more work than we give it credit for
discontinuation is doing more work than we give it credit for — a position I have arrived at slowly and would like tested.
Regained most of it over a year and spent that year assuming it was my fault. It was not; it is what the literature describes.
Stopped abruptly once and gradually once. The gradual one was easier to interpret because I could see what was changing.
Had the conversation with a clinician before stopping rather than after. Considerably easier that way round.
Ask me anything specific. Anything general I will probably get wrong.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Left up. It is honest about the reason for stopping and about the timeline.
That is a pause rather than a stop, and the plans for the two are not the same.
Appetite is the proximal effect and weight is the lagging integrated outcome, which is why watching appetite gives you an earlier and more honest signal.
Interval stretching lowers the trough concentration while keeping the dose; dose reduction lowers the level while keeping the rhythm. They are different interventions with different subjective profiles.
What the evidence says about stopping, written plainly because the framing does real damage.
Withdrawal studies across this class consistently show substantial regain after discontinuation. Appetite typically returns first, well before weight changes. This is a finding about the pharmacology of a chronic condition, in the same way that blood pressure rises again when an antihypertensive is stopped.
People on this board quit in shame over an entirely predictable result, and then avoid coming back because they have interpreted it as a personal failure. It is not. Knowing that in advance is the single most useful thing this board can offer anybody planning to stop.
appetite comes back before the weight does
Withdrawal studies across this class consistently show substantial regain after discontinuation, with appetite typically returning before weight changes. That is a description of the pharmacology of a chronic condition.
Nothing on this board is a taper schedule, and no member can write one for another. What can be shared is what people watched and what they observed.
Nothing on this board is a taper schedule, and no member can write one for another.
Adding the one process step — write down where you are before you change anything.
Right, and the habits from the losing phase are the part that has to outlive the dose.
a fortnight of nothing is not evidence that you are fine
a fortnight of nothing is not evidence that you are fine
This is the sentence that reframes the whole board. Appetite first, scale later.
With a week-long half-life, exposure declines over several weeks after the last dose rather than stopping with it. The lag is why the first fortnight is uninformative.
Do you have a written baseline from before you started changing anything?
Preparing to stop, as described by people here who have done it.
Write down where you are first: dose, date, weight, waist, and an honest note about how appetite feels. That page is what makes the following six months interpretable rather than a fog of impressions.
Decide in advance what you are watching for and over what period — appetite in the first month, weight over three, and a specific threshold at which you would want to revisit the decision. Have the conversation with a clinician before rather than after.
None of that is a schedule. It is a way of arriving at whatever happens next with information rather than with a vague sense of how it is going.
Agreed. Appetite is the leading indicator and the scale is the lagging one. Watch the first, not the second.
A written baseline — dose, date, weight, waist, and how appetite feels — taken before any change is what makes the following months interpretable rather than a series of impressions.
- 1Withdrawal studies across this class consistently show substantial regain…6 comments in this branch · started by u/taper_off_tabitha