Dr.LipidDallas 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…

I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here. The thread has converged on the tidiest answer rather than the best-supported one, and those are not the same thing.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.ReproEndo said:

I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here.

Coming at Dr.ReproEndo’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

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.