lisa_labSD 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 on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.

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

lisa_labSD 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.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.

hyun_seoul said:

The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.

Same pattern here, and in the same order.

hyun_seoul said:

The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.

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