The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
the goal of this new medicine which I call medicine 3.0 is not to patch people up and get them out the door removing their tumors and hoping for the best but rather to prevent the tumors from appearing and spreading in the first place or to avoid that first heart attack or to divert someone from the path to Alzheimer's disease
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
medicine 3.0 really has two main Hallmarks uh the first is that it is aimed at preventing rather than treating chronic disease by acting early acting aggressively and tailoring the therapies to the individuals based on the best available evidence which is not necessarily going to be derivable from randomized control trials