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

How long did you give it before you decided it was working?

steph_laguna said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.

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

steph_laguna said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.

steph_laguna said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.