small win: dual agonist stopped being a problem at week 50
small win: dual agonist stopped being a problem at week 50, and the part I actually want to talk about is at the bottom.
Week 7 was the first time the scale moved after a five-week stall. I changed nothing in that window.
On comparing yourself with the trial number.
SURMOUNT-1 reported roughly 21% mean body weight change at 72 weeks on the highest arm. Three things get dropped every time that figure is quoted here. It is a mean, and the distribution around it is very wide. It is 72 weeks, which is a year and a half. And it is a trial population with trial support, which is not the same as a person with a spreadsheet.
Use it as a rough shape, not a benchmark. A 12% year is inside the ordinary range and people quit over it every week on this board.
Not medical advice, obviously, and nothing here is approved for human use. One person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
The 21% figure is a 72-week mean on the highest arm. Quoting it as what someone should expect by week 53 is not a fair reading.
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.
Agreed, and the trial number is a mean of a very wide distribution — the tails are enormous and nobody posts from the middle.
Yes — 10mg being a genuine landing place for a lot of people is underrated. There is no medal for 15.
Small fix: SURMOUNT is the obesity programme, SURPASS is the type-2 programme. They are different endpoints and the numbers do not transfer.
Small fix: SURMOUNT is the obesity programme, SURPASS is the type-2 programme.
Agreed, with one qualifier: that is the mean of the top arm and the spread around it was enormous.
Disagree with the conversion table. There is no validated equivalence between the two molecules and posting one as though there is does real damage.
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.
That percentage is body weight change, not body fat. Different measurement, and the distinction gets lost every time.
Did you come to this from sema, and if so how long was the gap?
Correction to my own post above — I said 2.5mg and I have been on 5mg since the spring. Same argument, wrong number.
Are you comparing yourself with the trial mean or with the people who post the most?
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.
dual agonist, so the GIP arm is doing something the sema threads will not tell you about
dual agonist, so the GIP arm is doing something the sema threads will not tell you about
Not sure about this bit. The GIP arm being real does not tell you that it is what caused your particular week.
Sulphur burps for the first eight days after each step, then nothing. Predictable enough that I planned my week around it.
week 2 is early to draw any conclusion at all
Agree. The GIP component is the interesting half and it barely gets discussed outside c/glp1science.
SURMOUNT-1 landed around 21% at 72 weeks on the top arm
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.
Careful with "everyone tolerates it better". The people it did not suit stop posting, which makes this board look calmer than the drug is.
This is the fifth "should I go up" post today and they are all welcome — but no member here can answer it for you.
2.5mg is a four-week starting dose, not a maintenance dose. Worth being precise since people search these threads.
2.5 is the starter dose and it is not meant to be the dose that works
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.
Have you held a step for longer than the four-week minimum at any point?
stepping every four weeks is a ceiling on speed, not a schedule you must hit
- 1Are you comparing yourself with the trial mean or with the people who post…9 comments in this branch · started by u/neha_falk
- 2Disagree with the conversion table. There is no validated equivalence…6 comments in this branch · started by u/samir_falk