carlos_SATX said:

Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.

carlos_SATX said:

Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.

Coming at carlos_SATX’s question from a different direction. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.

One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.

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

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

How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?

dan_philly said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

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.