PeptideChemSF said:

Steady state is the thing most people miss.

I will push back on the "any working dose is fine" framing. The maintenance evidence sits overwhelmingly at the top studied dose, and the extension data shows regain tracking dose reduction rather than tracking stopping. Holding low is reasonable; pretending it is evidentially equivalent is not.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone assembling their own picture: Tmax is one to three days, terminal half-life about 165 to 170 hours, steady state at four to five weeks, and subcutaneous bioavailability near 89%. Those four numbers explain most of the questions people ask about timing.

InsuranceTom said:

I will push back on the "any working dose is fine" framing.

Coming at InsuranceTom’s question from a different direction. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

One thing that is still open after B12Beth’s answer:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

Reporting back.

Six weeks on from posting: I stopped reading the weekly number and started reading a four-week average, and the "stall" I opened this thread about was a 1.8kg loss I could not see.