hyun_seoul said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

That reframing is the part I needed.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

Dr.MetabolicMD said:

Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.

I read this differently from Dr.MetabolicMD, on substance rather than tone. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. No action needed from anybody.