yoko1,
Apparently you either have not read the EASA query of the NG trim system (previously referenced), or you choose to ignore what was written.
Similarly you overlook that ease of trimming in normal flight conditions might not be the same as in abnormal conditions - extreme tail angles, nor that trimming with an alleviating tail load (nose down) involves different forces against the load in failed conditions (nose up).
Conversely to your previous assertion; there is nothing in the entire history of the 737 trim system since the introduction of the NG (larger tail) that indicates that the Manual Wheel or Electric Trim would be able to recover from high aerodynamic load; excepting what has been deduced from two accidents.
Whereas you fail to qualify your assertion, the opposing argument is that where an aircraft is deliberately mis trimmed and the resultant force held on the control column, it is probable that a limiting force or ability to apply more trim is reached before the physical stops (flight test techniques AC25-7, within the aircraft flight envelope not necessarily at the extremes of physical tail angle).
But if the aircraft is already in a extreme condition, greater that previously identified during flight test to due to a malfunction, then there is nothing to say either way that the aircraft can be recovered - except accidents.