[Results] 74 weeks, 23kg, and GIP was the hard part
Here it is: 74 weeks, 23kg, and GIP was the hard part. One person, one log, no control group, so read it accordingly.
74 weeks and 23kg. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour.
8kg over 21 weeks, never went past 10mg, and muscle cramps stayed mild the whole way. Posting because the loud threads are all 15mg.
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.
Corrections welcome, especially the pedantic ones. Pedantry is how this board earns its reputation.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Trial identifiers corrected in the title. SURMOUNT and SURPASS are different programmes.
Disagree with the conversion table. There is no validated equivalence between the two molecules and posting one as though there is does real damage.
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.
Appetite effect for me is flat across seven days. On sema it was a wave. Same person, different molecule.
Are you comparing yourself with the trial mean or with the people who post the most?
What is the waist doing? That is usually the number still moving during a scale stall.
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.
hold the dose that works, the ladder is not a leaderboard
Held 7.5 for five months. Everyone kept asking when I was going to 10. The answer was never, because 7.5 was working.
a lot of people plateau nicely at 10mg and never need 15
Yes. I stepped to 12.5 because the calendar said so, not because anything needed fixing, and I regretted it for a fortnight.
Agree. The GIP component is the interesting half and it barely gets discussed outside c/glp1science.
Switching from semaglutide, since three people asked in this thread alone.
There is no published dose equivalence between the two. The conversion tables that circulate are somebody’s arithmetic, not data. What people report here is that the first month after a switch is often flat, that the appetite effect feels differently shaped rather than simply stronger, and that starting at the bottom of the ladder again is the common approach.
None of that is a recommendation. It is what the threads say, and the threads are not a clinic.
2.5mg is a four-week starting dose, not a maintenance dose. Worth being precise since people search these threads.
Which week did the appetite change actually land for you?
the four-week step schedule is the label, not folklore
if 7.5 is working, 10 is not automatically better
switching from sema is not a dose conversion, there is no clean equivalence
stepping every four weeks is a ceiling on speed, not a schedule you must hit
Week 24 was the first time the scale moved after a five-week stall. I changed nothing in that window.
Pen or vial? The step sizes available differ and it changes this answer.
Have you held a step for longer than the four-week minimum at any point?
Went 10 to 12.5 on the calendar and had the worst fortnight of the whole run. Dropped back to 10 and everything settled.
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.
Did you come to this from sema, and if so how long was the gap?
- 1Vials and pens carry the same molecule; what differs is fill volume, device…8 comments in this branch · started by u/emil_barros