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.
I'm reading right now a phenomenal book that everyone listening to the podcast and you should read the book of Y by a Judea pearl or you day a pearl who's a professor at UCLA and his area is causal inference and he goes through in the book some of the fascinating math that corresponds with Diagnostics in particular
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.