labquiet_amy 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.SportsMedIN said:

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

Coming at Dr.SportsMedIN’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.

Following on from julia.endo — and this may be the naive question:

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.

Holding the step for six weeks instead of four did it. Same dose, same food, and the nausea that had felt like a wall turned out to be a timing problem.