zoe_NC said:

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.

Pushing back on zoe_NC here. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

zoe_NC said:

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.

That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.

zoe_NC said:

Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause.

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.

Dr.ReproEndo said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.