roxy_nash said:Steady state is faster than people expect: half-life about five days, so you are at plateau in roughly three to four weeks rather than five.
Dose-response modeling for tirzepatide: Emax model fitting to the STEP/SURMOUNT dose-finding data shows:
Semaglutide: ED50 ≈ 0.6mg, Emax ≈ -18%, Hill coefficient ≈ 1.3
Tirzepatide: ED50 ≈ 6mg, Emax ≈ -25%, Hill coefficient ≈ 1.5
Clinical implication: most patients achieve >80% of maximal response by the mid-range dose (1.7mg sema, 10mg tirz). Going to the maximum dose provides diminishing returns — possibly not worth the additional side effect burden for some patients. Individualize dosing based on response vs tolerability.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Whether anyone has held 10mg long term rather than climbing, and what happened over the following year?
TirzTom said:Dose-response modeling for tirzepatide: Emax model fitting to the STEP/SURMOUNT dose-finding data shows: Semaglutide: ED50 ≈ 0.6mg, Emax ≈ -18%, Hill…
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsReporting back.
I stayed at 10mg. Another six months, another 7kg, no new side effects, and my reading of the dose-response says the last two steps were never going to be worth what they cost me.
hyun_seoul said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
True, though the ladder is longer and that is not a neutral detail — six dose steps means six opportunities to stall on the way up, and plenty of people never reach the dose the headline number came from.