u/sanne_novak

I would not change the programme on the strength of one scan. The measurement error is larger than the effect you are reacting to.

step therapy is a documentation problem, not an argument

Different laboratories use different assay platforms with different calibration. Comparing across labs adds a systematic offset that is invisible on the report.

Lost slower for six months deliberately and my composition change was not obviously different. Training was what mattered.

Correction to my own post above — I said 12.5mg and I have been on 10mg since the spring. Same argument, wrong number.

SURMOUNT-1 landed around 21% at 72 weeks on the top arm

baseline before you start is worth more than any later panel

Disagree with reading anything into that. One value, one morning, and you changed two other things in the same window.

the trials titrated on a calendar, real people titrate on symptoms

Cosigning on baseline. The panel I regret most is the one I did not take before starting.

I would not draw a line through two points, especially when the second was taken at a different time of day.

Employer plan or individual plan?

What is the appeal deadline on the letter?

the appetite effect is blunter than sema, in a good way, most weeks

Did you come to this from sema, and if so how long was the gap?

Vendor source pages carry an outbound link to the supplier’s own storefront, marked nofollow and sponsored, disclosed on the page and again on the funding page. Nothing is received for it.

switching from sema is not a dose conversion, there is no clean equivalence

emil_wojcik is right that the two molecules are not interchangeable. There is no published conversion and the ones circulating are invented.