VanRx_Mike said:

There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

Coming at VanRx_Mike’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.

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

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

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

jason_paloalto said:

Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…

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.

Closing the loop on my own question.

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer. Nothing about my case changed; only who was doing the talking.