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.
so in our a thousand people that we did the fascinating thing about this is all these people who actually followed them up and actually talked to them and kind of found out what happened and so we actually had two false positives so these were two people where we kind of thought okay there's a problem here that you need to get addressed further by their further imaging and see what's going on
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.