One thing that is still open after JenPlateau’s answer:

How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?

InsuranceTom said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.

InsuranceTom said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement. Anything that moves day to day needs a trend before it means anything at all.

InsuranceTom said:

Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. I will report back once I have actually tried it.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.