The math ain't mathing

Howdy, I am not a math girlie so I'm hoping someone here might be equally curious to my confounding situation and offer some help.

Several weeks back I posted that at a daily calorie intake of around 1850, I wasn't achieving any loss as an active ~225lb 37yo woman. Much of the comments suggested to lower my intake.

Since, I've started on a couple medications that have knocked out a lot of food noise and essentially made it so much easier for me to say "ooh that sounds good...but I'm not even hungry" (this alone has been transformative for me but that's another post for another time). Accordingly, my intake has gone down while I still feel fed and strong and can workout, etc.

I've lost 4.8lbs in 24 days eating an average of 1607 calories per day in that time**.** I'm so happy with that loss and that rate, and even with the likelihood that it'll slow over coming weeks, but I'm also so confused when I think about the math.

-24 days at 1607 calories is 38,568
-4.8 lbs at 3,500 cals per lb is a calorie deficit over the same time of 16,800 calories
-If I were eating at maintenance then, my total calories over 24 days would have been 55,368, or about 2,307 calories per day
-If ~2,300 was required for maintenance, why then wasn't I losing at all when consistently eating at 1850, which would be a deficit of about 550 calories? I was tracking meticulously (as I am now), and even if I were to waver a couple hundred calories on an off day here or there, that would still be a steady, significant deficit over the 4ish weeks I'd been following that limit.

Again, I'm not mad about it, just confused. I like to think I have a fairly solidly foundational understanding of the mechanics of weight loss, but this just isn't adding up...