roxy_nash said:

The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.

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.

Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

B12Beth said:

Steady state is the thing most people miss.

That reframing is the part I needed. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

roxy_nash said:

The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.

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.

Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. With resmetirom now available for MASH, combination approaches are being explored, so the standard of care in this area is moving faster than most threads assume.

Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.