Dr.BariatricHTX said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

hyun_seoul said:

The mechanism that matters here is not stomach emptying, it is central.

This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Taking it to my next appointment.

Dr.BariatricHTX said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

I will push back on the "any working dose is fine" framing. The maintenance evidence sits overwhelmingly at the top studied dose, and the extension data shows regain tracking dose reduction rather than tracking stopping. Holding low is reasonable; pretending it is evidentially equivalent is not.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

Moderator note: a couple of off-topic posts removed.