Coming back to: How much context is too much context in a first post?

Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How much context is too much context in a first post?

Counting it rather than describing it, because the count is the part that can be argued with.

31 instances over 11 weeks, recorded the same way each time, 4 of them different enough from the rest that I have set them aside and said so.

That is the whole dataset. The question in the title is what it does and does not support.

I had written a reply contradicting the opening post and deleted it. Here is what survived.

Do not apologise in the first line. It costs you the space where the question should be, and nobody here thinks a question is an imposition.

The general answer and the answer for your case may diverge here.

Context that matters: compound, how long in, current dose, relevant history. Context that does not matter: how you feel, your hopes for the outcome, your medical history beyond what affects this specific question. The first set gets you answered. The second set makes the reply longer without making it better.

A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.

Adding the measurement that post #6 says would settle it.

Lab result questions: state the result, the reference interval, and what else is on the same panel. A single flag on a single draw is usually uninformative without context.

Old habit: I write down the expected answer before I calculate it.