roxy_nash said:

There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.

SarahChen_PharmD said:

The mechanism that matters here is not stomach emptying, it is central.

This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Taking it to my next appointment.

roxy_nash said:

There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

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.

One concrete data point for the thread. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.

Moderator note: a couple of off-topic posts removed.