Dr.GastroMayo said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Coming at Dr.GastroMayo’s question from a different direction. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.

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

Following on from Dr.GastroMayo — and this may be the naive question:

Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?

Dr.GutHealth said:

If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.

I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.

Reporting back.

Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence. Two of the three things suggested helped; I cannot separate them and I am not going to pretend otherwise.