BenResearch_OR said:

SURMOUNT-1 landed around 20.9% mean weight loss at 15mg over 72 weeks, against roughly 15% for semaglutide 2.4mg in STEP 1.

I read this differently from BenResearch_OR, on substance rather than tone. The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me. It is better on mean weight loss, and the cardiovascular outcome evidence is far thinner than semaglutide's. If the reason for treating is cardiovascular risk rather than weight, the evidence base points the other way.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.

MikeFit_NJ said:

The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me.

Coming at MikeFit_NJ’s question from a different direction. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.

Following on from wei_SG — and this may be the naive question:

Whether anyone has held 10mg long term rather than climbing, and what happened over the following year?

Closing the loop on my own question.

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.