the milestone thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down
Right, the milestone question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 22 data points over 12 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 9, not week 58. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Yeah, text-only removes the comparison.
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Yeah, text-only removes the comparison.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with non-scale victory, not with what you concluded.
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
Stalled for 22 weeks, changed nothing, and it started moving again on week 41.
the milestone change matters as much as the scale
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
no images, none, not even redacted ones
Yeah, text-only removes the comparison.
Three years on this site and the questions have not changed at all. Which is depressing or reassuring depending on the day.
Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 2–5. Practical consequence: what you feel in week 1 is not what that dose does.
no images, none, not even redacted ones
no images, none, not even redacted ones
Adding to this: milestone is doing more work than the comment implies.
include timeframe and starting point or it is a brag with no info
text only is the whole point of the community
include timeframe and starting point or it is a brag with no info
This is correct. Process matters more than the number.
Came off after 61 weeks for financial reasons. Regained about a third over the following year. Back on now at a much lower dose.
the timeframe change matters as much as the scale
Australia here. Waited 22 months on a list, gave up, went private, and the total cost was roughly what I expected.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
ask your actual doctor, not us
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.
include timeframe and starting point or it is a brag with no info
- 1Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell…7 comments in this branch · started by u/rasmus_kimani
- 2Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 2–5.…6 comments in this branch · started by u/meera_sandvik