Dr.GastroMayo said:

The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.

Same pattern here, and in the same order. Posting only so the count is not one.

Dr.GastroMayo said:

The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

VendorMark said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. 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.