Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?

jason_paloalto said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

I read this differently from jason_paloalto, on substance rather than tone. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful.

Old thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. 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.