Yes...much prior activity in a generally seismic region may possibly mask possible relationships that may exist (and be better pursued and understood if one had a theory to go with it). This is why a full statistical analysis would be required to show the background rate against a hypothesized effect.... This is where the search prior to any nuclear testing comes in.

So in a phrase, this region is probably not the best area to use in an example which may seek to examine "artificially induced forces" with subsequent (strong / great) earthquakes. Of course, other possible causative factors are not mentioned here....

In other conversations, I believe LW mentioned that the CA Landers quake broke some of the accepted thinking in why/where strong earthquakes happen.... The topic in this thread is along these lines...though the cited material is more of a surface treatment / suggestion/ something to think about...rather than a full analysis.

.03