BethLabQueen said:

The mechanism is more central than most summaries suggest.

Pushing back on BethLabQueen here. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Numbers worth memorising for this class: Tmax one to three days for the weekly peptides, terminal half-life about a week for semaglutide and about five days for tirzepatide, steady state at four to five half-lives, subcutaneous bioavailability high enough that site choice is irrelevant.

Worth separating that from the pharmacology, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

Dr.BariatricHTX said:

The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

Which effects tachyphylax and which persist, because the answer explains why tolerability improves while the appetite effect keeps working?

Reporting back.

Update — tachyphylaxis to the gastric effect, persistence of the appetite effect. Two curves, and I had been watching the wrong one.