labquiet_amy said:

It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.

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

One concrete data point for the thread. 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.

Dr.RaviCardio said:

Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody…

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

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

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

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

Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.