Nothing here is medical advice and a progress report is a description of what happened to one person under uncontrolled conditions.
If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess.
0 likes 22d
Outcomes · Progress reports · continued
An 18-month record including the parts that went badly posts 61–82
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Genuine question rather than a rhetorical one: has anyone here actually observed 18-month record, as opposed to read about it? The thread is long and I cannot tell.
0 likes 21d
c.dahlberg, post #51: One more thing on 18-month record that took me far too long to see: the two figures people quote are not measuring the same quantity. Once you notice that, the apparent contradiction disappears. Go to post
Coming back to post #59, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
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 #63 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
I have no financial interest in anything named in this thread and I want to say so before I comment on 18-month record, because it is the sort of subject where it matters.
4 likes 19d
Post #63 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
A single scale used throughout beats a more accurate scale introduced halfway through. Consistency beats accuracy for a trend.
0 likes 18d
crossover_entry, post #61: Nothing here is medical advice and a progress report is a description of what happened to one person under uncontrolled conditions. If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess. Go to post
Two people in this thread mean different things by 18-month record and are disagreeing about the definition while believing they are disagreeing about the facts. Worth pausing to define it.
m.dalgaard, post #48: Confirming post #45 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person. Self-reported intake is optimistic in a consistent direction, and saying so in your own report is more credible than not. The interesting part of this is the exception, and I do not understand the exception. Go to post
Thank you — that answers what I came here to find out.
Confirming post #66 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Medication changes: escalating dose, or adding or removing other medications, can affect the rate of weight loss. Documenting medication changes alongside weight makes the record interpretable.
2 likes 14d
Agreed on 18-month record, with one qualification that I think matters. The reasoning holds for the case as described. Change the starting assumption and it does not, and the starting assumption is the part nobody states.
4 likes 13d
r.jhannsdttir, post #18: 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. If that is already documented somewhere, ignore me and link it. Go to post
The arithmetic in post #68 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
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.
The reason 18-month record is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent.
2 likes 11d
Two sentences on 18-month record and then I will stop, because the rest is speculation and the thread is better without mine.
What is documented is narrow. What is inferred from it is broad. The gap between them is where every argument here lives.
8 likes 10d
crossover_entry, post #61: Nothing here is medical advice and a progress report is a description of what happened to one person under uncontrolled conditions. If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess. Go to post
Building on post #70 rather than restating it.
If a pattern survives a rolling-mean treatment it is worth explaining. Most do not, and that is the useful finding.
Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.
Useful. I had the fact and not the reason, which turns out to be the important half.
13 likes 6d
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Post #74 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
An observation about 18-month record that I cannot explain and am posting anyway, on the principle that unexplained observations are more useful public than private.
e.bakken, post #75: Rate of change matters more than the absolute number for most of the questions people ask about their own series. A single observation, in a thread that deserves better than single observations. Go to post
Where I part company with post #75, and it is a narrow parting.
Photographs at fixed intervals under fixed conditions are a better record of composition change than the scale, and much harder to standardise.
Post #78 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Reframing 18-month record slightly, because I think the disagreement is about the question rather than the answer. If the question is "does it happen", yes. If it is "how often", nobody here knows.
0 likes 3d
The best progress reports here read as records rather than as arguments, and that difference is visible within a sentence.
Worth reading the earlier posts in this thread before acting on mine.
2 likes 2d
e.dalgleish, post #5: 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. Go to post
Maintenance series are the ones this subcategory needs most and receives least. The interesting questions all change once loss stops.
This topic was referenced in
- Seven-day rolling means and why weekly readings mislead — one year onOutcomes › Progress reports · 88 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[2026 update] Reporting a disappointing outcome, and why it belongs here
On the subject in the title: Reporting a disappointing outcome, and why it belongs here Working notes rather than a conclusion. Proposing that Reporting a disappointing outcome deserves a maintained page…
|
2 | 11k | 8mo | |
|
[2026 update] Waist circumference technique and its repeatability
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Waist circumference technique and its repeatability Everything below is what sits behind that. An honest uncertainty about Waist circumference technique rather than…
|
+23 | 27 | 5.9k | 21h |
|
A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — does this still hold?
A 40-week log with the measurement method stated — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Posting a small dataset on 40-week log. It is…
|
+1 | 5 | 14k | 2mo |
|
A plateau that disappeared when I changed how I measured — the long version
A plateau that disappeared when I changed how I measured — the long version — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A narrow question about plateau, deliberately narrow, because…
|
+49 | 54 | 9.4k | 1mo |
|
Seven-day rolling means and why weekly readings mislead
Seven-day rolling means and why weekly readings mislead Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Posting a series rather than a conclusion, with the method first.…
|
+109 | 125 | 42k | 10h |
Related topics — sharing the tags data table, long read, effect size
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning
On the subject in the title: Citing a preprint in a maintained document: our rule and its reasoning Working notes rather than a conclusion. A preprint question rather than a question about the finding in it.…
|
2 | 467 | 4mo | |
|
Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation — a second dataset
Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting a small dataset on Measurement error in home…
|
2 | 13k | 7mo | |
|
A pooled estimate that changed when one trial was added
A pooled estimate that changed when one trial was added — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I was wrong about pooled estimate in a thread last spring and I would like to…
|
+24 | 28 | 3.5k | 2d |
|
SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on
Posting this under the heading it deserves: SURMOUNT-4 and what withdrawal data does and does not tell an individual — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. I would like to disagree carefully…
|
+122 | 136 | 48k | 9mo |
|
Criticising the method without criticising the authors
Criticising the method without criticising the authors Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I was wrong about criticising the method without criticising in a…
|
+55 | 61 | 60k | 15mo |