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

Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?

wendy_avl said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source.

wendy_avl said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.

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