reading some of these posts about 100+ lbs down, it’s good to see the scale moving. but if you’re looking at a long cut, we need to talk about the tissue cost. my semaglutide run, 40 lbs down, showed real collagen loss on my face. hit at 0.75mg weekly, not just angle or water.
actual facial deflation. then i ran tirzepatide, 35 lbs down, 0.5mg weekly. face held up. that GIP component seems to do something different for skin.
or at least it didn’t trash it the same way. if you’ve got a lot of weight to lose, this becomes a structural problem over time. fast weight loss is gonna pull the rug out from under your dermis. doesn’t matter how much protein you eat.
the goal isn’t just a number, it’s how you look and feel at that number. consider a slower ramp, or prioritize tirz if collagen is a concern. it’s not about looking ‘normal’ versus ‘not normal’, it’s about what you’re willing to pay in tissue health for the speed. my baseline collagen from 20 years firehouse exposure is already compromised.
so my results aren’t a direct comparison, but the difference was clear.
facial deflation is a tough one, totally get that. i’m on sema myself (week 18) and really focused on lean preservation now, not just the scale.
the “tissue cost” you’re flagging makes me think about how lymphatic clearance can lag. sometimes, especially with rapid loss, adipose mobilizes faster than clearance can keep up
i definitely noticed that “facial deflation” too, especially around week 14 on sema. it’s a real thing, and i think it’s because facial fat pads are still just fat tissue, so when you’re losing significant weight fast, they’re going to be part of that. ✌️ while the GIP component might help with overall lean mass retention, i’m not convinced that translates directly to collagen preservation in the face, especially if protein intake isn’t consistently optimized. both molecules drive fat loss.
the actual facial deflation is a real observation, and it makes sense to track that tissue cost. but for the tirz run, 0.5mg weekly is a tolerability ramp, not really an effect dose.
attributing collagen preservation to the “gip component” at that level stacks a dose confound onto a receptor-arm claim that already reads tidier than the evidence supports. that’s a lot of work for a sub-therapeutic dose to do on its own.
the “tissue cost” idea definitely resonates… especially for women who’ve been pregnant recently, there’s an added layer with connective tissue health to consider.
relaxin from pregnancy can keep ligaments and overall tissue integrity a bit more lax for a while post-delivery, and that can extend even further if you’re breastfeeding… so when you "pull
interesting data points on facial changes, but the specific doses you’re using for that sema vs. tirz comparison make it hard to really isolate a GIP effect on collagen. 0.5mg tirz is a low dose where the GLP-1 receptor occupancy isn’t doing much for appetite suppression, and any GIP contribution