HPLC_Greg said:

Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.

Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause. Leaving the original post as written rather than editing it, so the mistake stays visible for whoever searches this next.

TrialTracker_MD said:

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.

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

TrialTracker_MD said:

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.