Following on from NurseKim_ATL — and this may be the naive question:

How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Update since I posted: I held at 1.7mg for a further twelve weeks and lost another 4kg slowly, which settles it for me. I was escalating because the number was available, not because I had stopped responding.

lucas_SP_BR said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.

Found this through search years later and it is still the best discussion of the question, so adding one thing. 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.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.