Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.

PharmHunterJen said:

It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Carry on.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.

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

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