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.
women are more likely to have ischemia with non-obstructive coronary disease from coronary microvascular dysfunction or coronary vasospasm they're more likely to have scad spontaneous coronary artery dissection and more likely to have stress cardiopathy than men so we really need more data about treating cardiovascular disease in women
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.
women are more likely to have ischemia with non-obstructive coronary disease from coronary microbacaster function or coronary vasos spasm they're more likely to have scad spontaneous coronary artery dissection and more like to have stress cardiomopathy than men so we really need more data about treating cardiovascular disease in women