A plateau that disappeared when I changed how I measured

Coming back to post #13, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.

Menstrual cycle: for people who menstruate, weight can shift by several pounds across the cycle due to fluid retention and other factors. Noting cycle phase when weighing reduces apparent noise.

post #17 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Seasonal patterns: some people report weight loss is slower in winter than summer. Body composition and activity changes might contribute. Noting the season is useful context.

Plateaus and resets: if weight loss stalls and then resumes, that is ordinary. It is not evidence that the medication stopped working. It is not evidence that it is still working either. It is a data point in a longer record.

Rate of change: reporting progress as "lost 5 kg in 12 weeks" is more useful than "currently at 82 kg" because the rate tells you whether the change is steady, accelerating, or stalling.

For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.

Longitudinal report with the method stated: same scale, same time of day, same conditions. A scale is a tool; use the same one each time. Consistency matters more than accuracy at capturing absolute weight.

Exercise volume changes: increasing exercise intensity or duration can mask weight loss (muscle gain) on the scale. Noting exercise changes when reporting weight helps interpret results.

Worth separating two things that post #20 runs together.

Protein intake and resistance training: both self-reported and therefore optimistic in most reports. Recording them anyway creates a record you can look back on.

Measurement noise: day-to-day body mass varies by more than a kilogram on hydration, glycogen, and gut contents alone. A weekly reading is a single noisy sample of a distribution. A seven-day rolling mean of daily readings has much lower noise.

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

post #26 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Menstrual cycle: for people who menstruate, weight can shift by several pounds across the cycle due to fluid retention and other factors. Noting cycle phase when weighing reduces apparent noise.

On post #24 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Longitudinal report with the method stated: same scale, same time of day, same conditions. A scale is a tool; use the same one each time. Consistency matters more than accuracy at capturing absolute weight.

Protein intake and resistance training: both self-reported and therefore optimistic in most reports. Recording them anyway creates a record you can look back on.

I read post #28 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Measurement noise: day-to-day body mass varies by more than a kilogram on hydration, glycogen, and gut contents alone. A weekly reading is a single noisy sample of a distribution. A seven-day rolling mean of daily readings has much lower noise.