This was answered several pages up and is worth repeating rather than re-litigating:

Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly. The point about trough rather than peak explains the pattern I was seeing on day six, which I had been blaming on the vial.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.

PharmacoVig_BOS said:

Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly.

Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:

Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.

Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:

The dose-response is real but shallow at the top. Across STEP 1 and STEP 4 the gap between 1.7mg and 2.4mg is a couple of percentage points of body weight on average, and the average is carrying a wide spread — plenty of people at 1.7mg sit above the 2.4mg mean. If a dose is working and tolerable, "working" is the relevant variable, not "maximal".

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

Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?

Dr.RaviCardio said:

The dose-response is real but shallow at the top.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.