VendorMark said:

The GIP arm is doing real work rather than padding the label.

I read this differently from VendorMark, 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.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.

pete_manc_UK said:

The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.

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

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

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

Reporting back after another eight months at the same dose. Still losing slowly, no new side effects, and no reason I can find to climb further.