Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

One concrete data point for the thread. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.

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

What actually works on a prior-authorisation denial, as opposed to the list of things that sound like they should work?

stefan_berlin said:

One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.

Pushing back on stefan_berlin here. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

Moderator note: a couple of off-topic posts removed. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.