I am only commenting on this current year to 18 months "higher' ice loss with the E N event...seen against an already exaggerated set of results over recent years.

I remember a certain commemorative sea expedition which (earlier this year) aimed to cross to the N of Siberia into the pacific, only to have to turn back when they came across impassable, unexpected and unknown sea ice. Turns out they went on the basis of model "observed' sea ice...which was very wrong.

So as you see, the recording methodology of sea ice is at best questionable in quality...or is misrepresented / altered before data issue.