Should I increase from 2.5mg to 5mg Mounjaro?

[UhOhRatPoo]

Hi. I know that this question will have been asked within lots of the longer threads but I can’t find a reliable way to search them so I hope some kind person with experience will help me in this new thread.

It’s a simple question really- should I increase my dose to 5mg?

I’m on my third 2.5mg pen having started at 81kg and now down to 76.

I’ve had no digestive side effects but I do wake up most mornings feeling a bit nauseous. It subsides after I’ve been up for a while but it means I can’t stomach breakfast first thing.

I am finding I am never hungry for lunch but do force myself to eat and feel better after I have done. Usually hungry for dinner and still enjoy a beer or a couple of glasses of wine with meal at weekends. Still eating chocolate/desserts in the evening but in smaller portions.

I’d say maybe the appetite suppression is diminishing a little bit but hard to tell. I don’t enjoy not feeling hungry as I am enjoying food less and it reminds me of how you feel when you are unwell and “off your food”. But I am determined to reach a healthy BMI.

Is it worth going up to 5, with the risk of nausea and diarrhoea or is this status quo on 2.5 good enough? I’d like to be 65kg by Christmas. But I can’t afford time off work and school runs etc if I get bad diarrhoea.

Well, that’s no difference to not being on it at all then, so may as well save the money?

Oh it’s very different.

How so?

I’ve been on Mounjaro for 2 years and absolutely could not eat a 2500 calorie meal even if I really wanted to, not even close.

Now see I can easily eat that when on MJ, although I have to say I’m still only on a 8mg dose weekly because the side effects are too much for me to go any higher at the moment. That’s why I have to track my calories as well as ensuring I hit nutrition goals otherwise I could easily eat that amount. I guess it shows we are all different.

You can’t imagine why there might be a difference between using Mounjaro to support healthy choices and trying to do it without? I don’t think there is much point in anyone trying to explain to you as you either can’t or won’t hear it anyway.

I dont think its that, I think its people thinking critically and asking why. The whole point of MJ (in my view) is you dont need to think about healthy choices - it happens organically. You reduce calories and eat better stuff. So you dont need it to 'support heathy choices' as you say - it just happens. Im not the poster you are referring to, but I simply don't get it. Im open to being told im wrong but have yet heard a reason that I understand.

I can only conclude, as I said before, that people psychologically and socially just feel something has to be hard for it to be worthwhile. So they go on lower doses to feel like they are doing something to aid the weightloss. I just dont see the point. But I love that its easy - I fully embrace it and have zero shame around that. Sadly there is a lot of shame still surrounding weightloss.

Buy the 5mg pen but only give yourself 3.75mg for a few weeks and see how you go. I have not had any nausea or diarrhea and I'm just started taking the 7.5mg dose. If I had diarrhea I'd cut back to 5mg again.

It doesn’t happen organically though, there are thousands of people talking about how they simply eat less, not better. Thats really crucial to their future health. If you don’t make an effort then you absolutely will suffer the consequences. I use MJ to help me maintain a healthy lifestyle, I could quite easily just eat as I did before, Just less of it, yes I would still lose the weight but I would be compromising my overall health which is the very reason I started MJ in the first place, to save my health.

The lower doses have worked for me so I stayed with them, no need to increase if it works. I’m a bit baffled that you think it’s a psychological need to be doing something, I am fully aware of what is going on I don’t need to ‘kid’ myself into anything. Socially? I don’t really go out socialising around food or drink anyway but I definitely still have my daily sugary coffee in Starbucks, not because I stayed on a low dose but because it fits into my daily calorie intake and I enjoy it.

You didn't respond to my post but surely you can see that eating a healthy and nutritious diet is important for people who are in significant calorie deficit for years (in some cases)? It's genuinely hard to get the correct nutrition on 1000 cals a day and not doing so over years is really bad for you, obviously!

As I said before, 'tracking' is not necessarily just about calories but ensuring you are eating enough protein, for example. It's not really an issue for someone who is on them for a couple of months but most people are on them for a lot longer than that.

I actually did and wrote a long post that then disappeared and I couldn't be arsed to rewrite. Ill try again.

Look Im not an expert and some people think I should have no say cos I wasnt technically overweight to begin with. All this is just my opinion, and I could be talking complete bollox (wouldn't be the first time) but I will give it anyway.

Firstly, to whoever said I lack credibility cos I wasnt overweight anyway, well Im not selling the stuff so I dont really care - Im not trying to persuade people Im actually trying to get people to persuade me cos I dont get it. Also, I think BMI is a bit of nonsense. The fact you cant take it at BMI 25 or 27 Im not sure, I think it odd because honestly most people look and feel better at BMI 20/21 (not all - but most I think). At 25 I have all the chins and wobbly bits, at 23 still a bit (I can achieve this naturally but its still a ballache) at 21 I feel and look great (and I cannot achieve this naturally without being uber depressed or having had a massive stomach flu or something). So thats my opinion on that, and the stats and even on here seems to show that no matter how big someone started out at, they want to get to about 21 and then maintain that. So why is the MJ cut off 25? Seems daft to me. Yes I did lie - its super easy.

As for healthy eating here is probably where I will lose people but here goes. I think that no one can decide what that even means - not even nutritional experts and doctors. Vegan, carnivore, keto, gluten-free, veggie, fruitarian. You have people saying protein is everything, that's the new obsession have you noticed that? No one used to talk about protein like they do now - it used to be fibre. Its the latest marketing ploy and now everything is labelled 'high protein'. Some experts think fruit is the devil, some think its life! Some think red meat is awful, some its the most nutrient dense thing you can have. High fat/low carb, low fat/high carb, leafy greens are essential for health and lots of - no leafy greens because they are toxic. We shouldn't be eating grains/legumes because they get stuck in gut - we should because they are just soooo good for us! If you take the burger analogy at some point in history every single part of the burger - bun, meat, salad, sauce, - has been demonised at some point. So I take the whole idea of 'healthy diet' with a massive pinch of salt (pardon the pun). I dont think there is any such thing, I think that it depends on the person, it depends on what they want at that time, and I think people should try harder to listen to their bodies and what it wants rather than being drowned out by food noise from childhood and being told certain food is 'bad' and 'good' and to clear our plates.

Also, im not convinced by the concept that if we dont eat 1000 calories a day with certain nutrients in the food daily we are going to get long-term sick. I say this because of all the evidence that fasting has such brilliant long-term outcomes and that we were designed to eat every three days - boom and bust. And im talking 30 day fasts. People have had their crohns, diabetes and other conditions reduced or cured by it, so I think we as humans think we are going to drop dead or be crippled by illness if we dont eat xyz for a while and I just dont buy it.

So in response to this - surely you can see that eating a healthy and nutritious diet is important for people who are in significant calorie deficit for years (in some cases)? It's genuinely hard to get the correct nutrition on 1000 cals a day and not doing so over years is really bad for you, obviously!
I dont think a 'healthy and nutritious diet' can be defined, and no i dont think calories of 1000 a day would be a problem for years to come for someone, no. Not at all.

People can be malnourished, it's a fact. They can be deficient in nutrients, that's also a fact; it's identifiable in blood tests and people exhibit adverse symptoms. They don't get that way by magic, they don't eat enough of the things their body needs. There is no one way to 'be healthy' but there are certain things that your body needs to function normally and cannot produce itself - this is indisputable. Your body can't synthesise 9 out of the 20 amino acids it needs to function so you need to consume enough protein to provide the amounts your body needs. Deficiencies in vitamins A, C, D, B12, folate, iron, calcium, iodine, zinc and magnesium cause problems pretty quickly. Just because there are different ideas about exactly what a healthy diet looks like (and you might be right that 'optimal' looks different for different people) doesn't mean that the whole thing is nonsense.

Fasting is fine if you are getting the things your body needs over time. You don't need everything every day.

I agree there are too many fads and too many companies try to jump on various band wagons to push their products, it was ever thus!

ETA - I am also not saying eating 1000 calories a day is a problem, I am saying it's a problem if you don't meet your bodies basic nutritional requirements. That's true no matter how many calories you eat but it's harder to meet the minimum standard if you are eating less without being strategic.

I stayed on each dose 2 months after going from 2.5 to 5 and feeling very sick. I found sucking sugared stem ginger 🫚 was the best thing for that.

Make sure you are drinking enough fluids and have some ginger on hand.

I agree that nutritional deficiencies exist. Had them myself many many times. I dont agree that its because people dont eat enough of xyz and if you do then you wont have them. Its more complex - or simple than that depending on how you look at it. For example, I was vegan for four years. Followed all the guidance to the letter, ate 'clean' ate loads of b12, iron etc and supplemented. Got incredibly sick and took years to recover. Few years ago I got sick again, and despite eating a shit tonne of leafy greens I had to take folic acid as I was deficient. Blue berries are supposedly a superfood these days - they make me very ill indeed. The protein claim I think is a theory not a fact. Like a lot of these things. If I eat a lot of starchy carbs (which I adore) I get terrible stomach aches. My boyfriend gets ratty and weak without a shit tonne of carbs every day (personal trainer).

Im not entirely disagreeing with you here - but I think we see it the opposite way. You think if you eat xyz you will be healthy and no deficiencies right?. What I am saying is the result is your body and how its reacting. If you are well and healthy and living off jam white bread sandwiches, you are absolutely fine. If you are a clean eating nazi doing all the 'right' things who is still having B12 and iron shots regularly you arent fine (this was me by the way). There is no way to plan for or be strategic about this. The result of whether you are ok, and eating ok, is simply whether you feel ok. So I disagree strongly that someone could not eat the way you define as healthy - or indeed anyone defines as healthy - and not actually be healthy. And vice versa.

I think you are right that there are lots of unknowns about how individuals respond to certain things (because there are lots of unknowns generally about how our bodies work). That doesn't discount the things we do know though. Eating all the correct macro and micro nutrients doesn't guarantee good health but that doesn't mean that the vast majority of people would be better off if they met minimum requirements for the essential nutrients that we need. I don't think that's particularly contentious. Examples of how individuals can react badly to diets which are generally considered healthy is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's like saying some people smoke and live to 90 so lets all light up!

The protein thing isn't theory as far as I know - it's well established that we simply lack the enzymatic pathways to synthesise some proteins from other molecules. As far as they are 'essential' it's basically accepted but there is some debate at the margins about whether all of them are essential under all circumstances but I believe the debate is about the nuances, not the core understanding.

Anyway - the point I was originally responding to was your question about why people bother to track. This is why lots of people do it. You may not think it's worthwhile but given what we know about how our bodies work (not withstanding the fact that we don't know everything), attempting to eat enough of the things we know our bodies need doesn't seem wild. I acknowledge it also doesn't guarantee good health, as you have pointed out.

Oh I do. But how does a drug that doesn’t prevent you eating 2500 calories in a single meal “support healthy choices”?

For me it’s about being able to choose not to. It really is that simple.

@obsessional Eating all the correct macro and micro nutrients doesn't guarantee good health but that doesn't mean that the vast majority of people would be better off if they met minimum requirements for the essential nutrients that we need. I don't think that's particularly contentious.
Its not contentious at all. Its mainstream thought. Also the protein thing. Doesnt make me believe it though. I dont believe there are set min requirements and essential nutrients for vast majority of us. I think we are all vastly different, with different sensitivies and preferences and tastes around food. I look at my autistic daughter who has lived off buttered pasta, rice and nuggets all her life (despite me losing my mind about it many times) and she is the healthiest person i know. A veggie or piece of fruit rarely touches her lips. Yet shes still running aroudn like a lunatic most days. The protein thing is a new thing. Noone was saying we need 100g of protein a few years ago. I think its been plucked out the air tbh. Same with fads in superfoods (tumeric, blueberries, avos). All had their moment didn't they.
I just think if you are sick, get tested and see what the go is, and supplement/up that type of food that has that nutrient in it. Otherwise just eat what you want. I know you think the vast majority of us NEED xyz and there are outliers, but I just dont think that is true. There are an awful lot of thriving vegans whose protein intake must be terrible yet there they are - being all alive! (veganism was a disaster for me, but carnivore was great so go figure).

Im not trying to be inflammatory - i genuinely wish I had your faith in mainstream 'knowledge' in general tbh. Questioning bloody everything gets utterly exhausting. Anyway, back to original point, im skinny with no effort and I dont think one bit about food. Its awesome and I will keep doing me. :) Great debate though thanks @obsessional

Questioning bloody everything gets utterly exhausting.

I can imagine it does 😂 Mainly because we can never be expert enough in everything to verify or contradict so we quickly meet an impasse.

Either way - it sounds like you have reached a good place with the help of WLIs. All the best to you 😊

@obsessional story of my life. Can you imagine how i was during Covid? Lol. 😂