Following on from DeniseRN_TPA — and this may be the naive question:

Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?

MikeFit_NJ said:

Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.

MikeFit_NJ said:

Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.

That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

MikeFit_NJ said:

Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.