This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. The line between titrate-through and stop is not severity, it is trajectory and what else is present. Nausea that peaks and improves within a week is the expected pattern. Nausea that is escalating, or that comes with severe upper-abdominal pain radiating to the back, or that prevents fluids for more than a day, is a different conversation and belongs with a clinician the same day.

HPLC_Greg said:

The line between titrate-through and stop is not severity, it is trajectory and what else is present.

Agreed on adaptation, with a caveat: adaptation applies to gastric emptying and not to everything. If your problem is the aversion rather than the fullness, waiting does less, because the aversion is central and it is the mechanism working as intended.

Dr.GutHealth said:

Holding genuinely reduces total burden rather than redistributing it, because the gastric-emptying component adapts.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so. The practical protocol is dull and it works: smaller meals, stop eating at the first sign of fullness rather than at the end of the plate, drop the fat fraction of meals in the two days after dosing, and do not lie down straight after eating. Most of what people call unmanageable nausea is a meal-size and meal-composition problem interacting with a stomach that is emptying slowly.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.