Dr.EndoEP said:

Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.

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.

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

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

bri_stats said:

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

I read this differently from bri_stats, on substance rather than tone. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

bri_stats said:

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

Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.