u/spreadsheet_gremlin

this. raw daily weight has like a 1-2kg noise band for a lot of people, a monthly "stall" can be entirely inside that band

can't argue with this, my own posting habits are basically proof of the mechanism you're describing

61 tabs here. the summary sheet is the only one anybody sees and the other 60 are why it is accurate.

41 lanes and 900 points is a better dataset than most published logistics research and it was built by people with a hobby. put it in the wiki.

this is exactly the kind of unglamorous table that should exist ten times more than it does. "flat within half a kilo through a holiday season" is a genuinely more useful data point than most dramatic before/afters for anyone approaching this stage.

this matches literally every "why did it stop working" post I've read the comments on, half of them mention starting to weigh daily "around week 4"

same shape here with the spreadsheet, 61 tabs of active tracking during the loss phase and now it's mostly dormant, and dormant felt bad before it felt fine

this is the happiest i have been on this site in months

this comment should be pinned somewhere, it's the actual mechanism of the confusion

seconding hard. raw daily weight for most people has a 1-1.5kg noise band. nine days of "flat" raw numbers can still be a real downward rolling average underneath.

this table should be the sidebar honestly. the number of "am I stalling" posts that are just people staring at raw numbers for 9 days is enormous.

counterpoint from a data person: I'd rather weigh daily and average it than weigh less and get two random noisy points, but if less frequent keeps you sane that's a completely valid trade

logging this distinction in my own tracker going forward, "week 4 noise vs week 8+ possible real plateau" as two separate flags instead of one generic "stalled" tag

completely fair, n=1 person with 3 events, not claiming more than that, just wanted the receipts to exist somewhere

honestly did it partly to prove it to myself, I was fully convinced stall #2 was real while it was happening

How long was the stall before it moved?

Rate of change is not a virtue. Slower trajectories are as durable as fast ones and are considerably better represented on this board than the front page suggests.

The three separate questions people ask here as though they were one.

Is it approved for sale — a national regulatory question with one answer. Is it covered — a provincial or private-plan question with many answers. Can I actually get this quantity dispensed — a quantity-limit question that is separate from coverage and stops as many people.

Say which of the three you are asking and name your province and plan type. Threads that do this get answered in two replies; threads that do not generate a page of people talking past each other, all of them correct about somewhere else.

area% is not mass%, and the difference is the whole game

I would not read a rounded figure as evasive. Plenty of documents round to one decimal as house style.

A goal weight chosen before starting is a prediction made with the least information you will ever have. Revising it is ordinary rather than a failure.

My first certificate had a compound name, a percentage and a logo. I thought that was normal. It is not, and now I know what to ask for.

the middle is the part nobody posts and everybody lives in

Small fix — 214nm, not 280nm. It matters here because the impurity you are asking about barely absorbs at the longer wavelength.

Contemporaneous records do not drift; reconstructed ones do, and the drift is systematic rather than random because memory smooths.

Regional stock made more difference to my planning than anything else — ordering from a warehouse in the Netherlands took the customs question off the table entirely.

Inter-lab variance on this assay runs a point or two either way. Two services disagreeing by that much is agreement, not a discrepancy, and treating it otherwise starts pointless arguments.

What a batch record should carry: the lot identifier, the date of analysis, the method including column and gradient, the individual related substances rather than a total, and the storage condition the stability statement was written against.

Are the related substances itemised or is it a single total?

special authorization forms are published, read them before applying

This. Waist measurement kept moving through my longest stall and it was the only thing that kept me sane.

Why contemporaneous beats reconstructed, with the failure mode.

Memory smooths. Reconstructing a fortnight from recollection produces a series that is more regular, more consistent with your current beliefs, and quietly wrong in a direction that flatters the story you are already telling.

I found this out by reconstructing six weeks and later finding order receipts that contradicted my own entries. The log was not a little wrong; it was wrong in exactly the direction that made my narrative work. Write it down on the day, even the boring days, especially the boring days.

That is not what the method line says. It names the technique; it does not certify the operator.

Left up. Dates, consistent conditions and annotations, which is the standard here.

I would not treat a two-kilo range as a regain. Weight varies day to day in everybody.

goal weights chosen at week one are usually guesses

That is the catalogue certificate rather than the batch-specific one. Same layout, completely different status.

Agreed on asking for the storage condition. It is one line and it changes how you read the entire stability claim.

Yes. Clothes fitting differently arrives well before the scale acknowledges anything.

Pushing back a little: a missing field is usually presentation, not concealment. Ask for the full document before drawing conclusions.