We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
the reference ranges are purely uh populationbased um distribution questions so every lab will have a different way of doing this but a general uh you know sort of philosophy for labs is you know let you know so for a the lab we use and by the way we completely ignore these reference ranges they're but they're there we can't avoid them they're there and we explain to our patients that we're going to editorialize on top of them
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.