stalled for 23 weeks at 2.4mg and I refuse to panic this time
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: semaglutide matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 11 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 21 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
The thing nobody prepared me for was that the appetite does not come back for a long time after you stop.
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
stalled at 5mg, went up, and regretted it, the stall would have broken anyway
Lost 19kg and gained a genuinely irritating amount of interest in analytical chemistry. This site did that to me.
stalled at 1.0mg, went up, and regretted it, the stall would have broken anyway
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
Did you time the injection consistently each week or was it more ad hoc?
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
the 2.4mg dose is not the target, it is just what the pen goes up to
Did you test the vial you received or are we going off the vendor COA?
my TSH moved before the scale did and i nearly missed it
How long were you at 2.4mg before you moved up?
week 22 and i am still not at maintenance, do not rush the ladder
nope, 0.25 counts, it is just not the dose most people stay on
Ozempic versus Wegovy versus research grade is the wrong argument, they are literally the same molecule
nope, 0.25 counts, it is just not the dose most people stay on
Slight fix: the number was 99.1, not 93.7. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
titration speed is weekly dosing plus side effects, period
Small correction: the trial was 22 weeks, not 18. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
stalled at 0.5mg, went up, and regretted it, the stall would have broken anyway
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
- 1The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.15 comments in this branch · started by u/arne_restrepo
- 2Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell…6 comments in this branch · started by u/dose_creep_dan