FDA_TrackerJim 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. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.

FDA_TrackerJim said:

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

True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.

FDA_TrackerJim said:

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

That reframing is the part I needed. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.

paige_pharma said:

The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.