Just a reminder that actually by definition consumer harm is the bedrock standard for antitrust litigation in the US. Scale and market power may be components of an argument for consumer harm, but they are not sufficient in and of themselves.
Which is really dangerous, IMHO, because a lot of the most vile bits of monopoly power can happen without directly causing immediate consumer harm.
You shouldn't need to prove consumer harm to win antitrust litigation. That should be just one of a few different harms, any one of which should be able to win antitrust litigation.