the trials titrated every four weeks to a target

noting for later the dual agonism is a mechanism claim. what people report here is that it feels steadier through the week, plenty of people stop at 5

coming from the other one, my first four weeks here were much easier than my first four weeks there

update on the earlier thing week two of a step is worse than week one for me every single time, which makes the four week rule feel arbitrary, steadier through the week for me

easier gi for me

the sweet spot thing is survivorship, the people it worked for stayed and said so, flatter across the week for me

15 is the top

dual agonist question what did FLOW show about the higher doses specifically

i sat at 7.5 for 11 months and never needed more, which is where the folklore comes from

the two compounds arent interchangeable week for week even if the effect ends up similar, no prize for moving

small correction to my earlier message the GI difference held for me right up to 15, which isnt what a couple of people here found

every time

what happened for people who stopped at 12 rather than climbing, context if you need it

week 34 update it took about four months before a given step felt steady rather than variable

thats a different population

SURMOUNT-1 is the weight trial and the SURPASS programme is the glycaemic one, and people quote them across each other constantly