One concrete data point for the thread. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

One thing that is still open after Dr.ReproEndo’s answer:

Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?

Dr.AddMedPHL said:

Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.

Reporting back.

Closing the loop. The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.

Found this through search years later and it is still the best discussion of the question, so adding one thing. 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.