15mg — my 12-week log, condensed into one table
Thinking out loud about this: 15mg — my 12-week log, condensed into one table.
The relevant figures are 15mg, and they come from the same log I have kept the whole time.
The thing nobody warned me about was how much of this is logistics — storing it, remembering it, the same day every week.
Appetite effect for me is flat across seven days. On sema it was a wave. Same person, different molecule.
Please do not ask me what dose you should be on. I genuinely do not know and neither does anyone else here.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
The step schedule question, answered properly, because it comes up weekly.
The label sets a minimum interval of four weeks between increases. That is a floor on how fast you may go, and it exists because tolerability, not efficacy, is what limits most people. There is nothing in the pharmacology that says you must increase at four weeks, or at eight, or ever.
What decides it in practice is whether the effect you want is still there. If appetite is quiet and the trend is going the right way, the dose is doing its job. If both have genuinely gone flat for six weeks or more, that is a conversation worth having with someone who knows your history.
Removed the conversion table. There is no published equivalence between the two molecules and posting one as fact is exactly the kind of thing that gets copied for years.
Correction to my own post above — I said 15mg and I have been on 10mg since the spring. Same argument, wrong number.
the nausea profile is genuinely gentler than people expect coming from sema
Agree. The GIP component is the interesting half and it barely gets discussed outside c/glp1science.
Agree.
Not sure about this bit. The GIP arm being real does not tell you that it is what caused your particular week.
SURMOUNT-1 ran 72 weeks with the top arm around 21% mean body weight change. SURPASS is the diabetes programme and reports glycaemic endpoints, so quoting the two interchangeably is a category error.
sulphur burps are the signature complaint and they are not dangerous
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.
2.5 is the starter dose and it is not meant to be the dose that works
Sulphur burps for the first eight days after each step, then nothing. Predictable enough that I planned my week around it.