TirzTom said:

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…

I dislike how confidently this board tells people to push through. Incidence figures around 20 to 25% at the higher doses are class-typical, but the trials also had a discontinuation column, and "manageable with protocols" is not the same as manageable for everyone.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.

Dr.MetabolicMD said:

I dislike how confidently this board tells people to push through.

Coming at Dr.MetabolicMD’s question from a different direction. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.

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

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

Whether holding at a lower dose for longer actually reduces total side-effect burden or just spreads it out?

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Follow-up: smaller meals, less fat in the two days after dosing, and not lying down afterwards. Unglamorous, and it worked within a fortnight.