how much of what we believe about appetite return actually comes from regain threads
The title is the whole question — how much of what we believe about appetite return actually comes from regain threads — but here is why I am asking.
Nothing on this board is a taper schedule, and no member can write one for another. What can be shared is what people watched and what they observed.
There is very little published guidance on stopping specifically, which is exactly why board consensus here should carry less weight than usual and a clinician conversation should carry more.
A written baseline — dose, date, weight, waist, and how appetite feels — taken before any change is what makes the following months interpretable rather than a series of impressions.
Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Removed the taper schedule written for another member. Describe your own experience instead.
Stretched from seven days to ten to twelve over four months. Appetite told me where the limit was each time.
coming back later is allowed and it is common
With a week-long half-life, exposure declines over several weeks after the last dose rather than stopping with it. The lag is why the first fortnight is uninformative.
appetite comes back before the weight does
Small fix — you have described interval stretching and called it a taper. The exposure profiles differ.
have the conversation with a clinician before, not after
Cosigning that cost and supply are legitimate reasons. Most of the stopping threads here are one of those two.
write down where you are before you change anything
Correction: that study measured regain after discontinuation, not loss of effect during treatment. Very different findings.
Push back: that is a taper schedule aimed at another member and this board does not host those.
Is this a pause or a stop? They are different plans.
Stopped for cost reasons. Appetite came back at about week 22, well before the scale moved, exactly as this board said it would.
Agreed that returning later is common and it is treated here as ordinary rather than as a defeat.
What the evidence says about stopping, written plainly because the framing does real damage.
Withdrawal studies across this class consistently show substantial regain after discontinuation. Appetite typically returns first, well before weight changes. This is a finding about the pharmacology of a chronic condition, in the same way that blood pressure rises again when an antihypertensive is stopped.
People on this board quit in shame over an entirely predictable result, and then avoid coming back because they have interpreted it as a personal failure. It is not. Knowing that in advance is the single most useful thing this board can offer anybody planning to stop.
Same. A quiet fortnight after stopping tells you very little; the interesting part starts later.
That is a pause rather than a stop, and the plans for the two are not the same.
nobody here can write you a taper schedule
a fortnight of nothing is not evidence that you are fine
Not convinced. Two weeks of stable weight is not evidence of anything yet.
Right, and the habits from the losing phase are the part that has to outlive the dose.
the habits are what has to carry it afterwards
Yes — the withdrawal literature is consistent and it is a pharmacological finding, not a moral one.
stopping is a plan, not an event
Correcting myself upthread: appetite returned at week 13 for me, not the week I posted.
cost and supply are the two most common reasons and both are legitimate
stopping abruptly and stopping gradually are different experiences
- 1Same. A quiet fortnight after stopping tells you very little; the…13 comments in this branch · started by u/controversial_only
- 2appetite comes back before the weight does6 comments in this branch · started by u/valeria_girard