dan_philly said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

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.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

dan_philly said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.

dan_philly said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.

Reporting back.

The bulks-list asymmetry was the piece I had missed entirely. It explains why one of my two pharmacies is still arguing it can supply and the other simply stopped.