lisa_labSD said:

The glucagon component looks paradoxical and is not.

Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.

julia.endo said:

Training does two things here and only one of them is on the scale.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.

Worth separating that from training through weight loss, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. No action needed from anybody.