One thing that is still open after anna.melb_AU’s answer:

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

LeilaHI said:

The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

LeilaHI said:

The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.

LeilaHI said:

The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

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

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.