Short answer first, then the reasoning. 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.

pete_manc_UK said:

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

That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. 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.

quinn_sf said:

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

Can confirm the pattern quinn_sf 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.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.