Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.

One thing that is still open after quinn_sf’s answer:

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

PharmacoVig_BOS said:

One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.

I read this differently from PharmacoVig_BOS, on substance rather than tone. 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.

Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source.