zoe_NC said:

Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.

zoe_NC said:

Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own.

That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.

zoe_NC said:

Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own.

Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.

Dr.CardioMD said:

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…

Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.