Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.

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

anna.melb_AU said:

The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.

anna.melb_AU said:

The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.

That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.

anna.melb_AU said:

The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.

Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Taking it to my next appointment.

Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.