Dr.NephBHM_UK 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…

Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.

Dr.NephBHM_UK 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…

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.

CarlaRPh_TPA said:

It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.

Same pattern here, and in the same order.

CarlaRPh_TPA said:

It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here. A large fraction of the apparent disagreement in these threads is two people using different units and both being right.