raj_cambridge said:

Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.

NurseAsh_DET said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. Nothing to add that would improve it.

NurseAsh_DET said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.