[Question] SURMOUNT — what am I missing here
SURMOUNT — what am I missing here. If this has been answered properly somewhere, link me and I will delete.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use. Anything in this thread about how a research vial "should" titrate is a discussion about chemistry, not a plan.
SURMOUNT-1 ran 72 weeks with the top arm around 21% mean body weight change. SURPASS is the diabetes programme and reports glycaemic endpoints, so quoting the two interchangeably is a category error.
The four-week interval in the label is a minimum. Nothing about the pharmacology requires you to step on schedule, and the trials stepped on a calendar because trials have to.
I will update this if the picture changes rather than quietly leaving it up.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Vials and pens carry the same molecule; what differs is fill volume, device tolerance and whether you are doing your own arithmetic. Neither is inherently more accurate.
week 7 is early to draw any conclusion at all
if 7.5 is working, 10 is not automatically better
Went 10 to 12.5 on the calendar and had the worst fortnight of the whole run. Dropped back to 10 and everything settled.
What step are you on and how long have you been there?
2.5 is the starter dose and it is not meant to be the dose that works
SURMOUNT-1 landed around 21% at 72 weeks on the top arm
the appetite effect is blunter than sema, in a good way, most weeks
Does food noise follow the day after the shot, or is it spread across the week?
Sulphur burps for the first eight days after each step, then nothing. Predictable enough that I planned my week around it.
the trials titrated on a calendar, real people titrate on symptoms
Weekly dosing again, half-life in the same neighbourhood as sema, so a step change takes about a month to reach steady state. Judging a new step at day five is judging noise.
Which week did the appetite change actually land for you?
Cosigning the four-week thing. It is a minimum interval, and treating it as a schedule to keep up with is how people end up miserable at 12.5.
hold the dose that works, the ladder is not a leaderboard
Came off sema and onto tirz with a two-week gap. The first month was flat and I assumed I had made a mistake. Month two it moved.
Correction to my own post above — I said 10mg and I have been on 2.5mg since the spring. Same argument, wrong number.
Week 24 was the first time the scale moved after a five-week stall. I changed nothing in that window.
2.5mg is a four-week starting dose, not a maintenance dose. Worth being precise since people search these threads.
Agree. The GIP component is the interesting half and it barely gets discussed outside c/glp1science.
The distribution matters more than the mean. In the trial population the interquartile spread was wide enough that two honest people can have completely different runs on the same arm.
That percentage is body weight change, not body fat. Different measurement, and the distinction gets lost every time.
18kg over 60 weeks, never went past 10mg, and injection-site soreness stayed mild the whole way. Posting because the loud threads are all 15mg.
It is a dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, and the GIP arm is the part that has no equivalent in the semaglutide threads. That is why the side-effect profile reads differently rather than just milder.
Not sure that follows. You went up a step and changed your training in the same fortnight.
pens and vials are the same molecule, the price is the difference
the nausea profile is genuinely gentler than people expect coming from sema
the four-week step schedule is the label, not folklore
This matches mine. Milder early fullness than I expected, and what there was settled inside a fortnight of each step.
- 1Went 10 to 12.5 on the calendar and had the worst fortnight of the whole…20 comments in this branch · started by u/amara_halonen