Dr.BariatricHTX said:

Steady state is faster than people expect: half-life about five days, so you are at plateau in roughly three to four weeks rather than five.

I read this differently from Dr.BariatricHTX, on substance rather than tone. The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me. It is better on mean weight loss, and the cardiovascular outcome evidence is far thinner than semaglutide's. If the reason for treating is cardiovascular risk rather than weight, the evidence base points the other way.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical numbers: half-life about 5 days, steady state 3 to 4 weeks, ladder 2.5 / 5 / 7.5 / 10 / 12.5 / 15mg, and the maintenance doses with published data behind them are 5, 10 and 15mg.

Dr.KarenChen said:

The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. SURMOUNT-1 landed around 20.9% mean weight loss at 15mg over 72 weeks, against roughly 15% for semaglutide 2.4mg in STEP 1. Different trials, different populations, so the comparison is indicative rather than decisive — but SURPASS-2 was a genuine head-to-head and it pointed the same way.

One thing that is still open after hans_munich’s answer:

Whether anyone has held 10mg long term rather than climbing, and what happened over the following year?

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Reporting back after another eight months at the same dose. Still losing slowly, no new side effects, and no reason I can find to climb further.