One thing that is still open after james_edin’s answer:

What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?

SallyK_inj 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 read this differently from SallyK_inj, on substance rather than tone. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

SallyK_inj 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…

No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.

Happy to go further on any of that.

SallyK_inj 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…

Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.