Taking the question as asked, rather than the general version of it. 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.

BethLabQueen said:

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

No disagreement with BethLabQueen. One condition attached. The meal advice is right and incomplete without the hydration point. People stop drinking because drinking makes them feel full, then attribute dehydration symptoms to the drug.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

nick_newbie said:

The nausea I get is not really nausea, it is an aversion.

Can confirm the pattern nick_newbie describes. 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. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.