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.
and it turns out that like this it's kind of a lockin key concept essentially um that that it has to structurally work out that the protein fragment is being presented you know in the t- cell receptor docking in and seeing that version but not the unmutated version right like where that difference is enough to basically tell the t- cell go like kill
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.
so this is you know the proof that these antigens are antigens I mean like to meet the definition of antigen you have to find in a human being that the immune system can actually see it um in the context of it being presented on these MHC complex
Whole-body MRI screening in healthy adults produces more incidentaloma harm than cancer-mortality benefit.
Starting colonoscopy screening at 45 (vs 50) prevents enough early-onset cancers to justify the population cost.
Multi-cancer liquid-biopsy tests like Galleri detect early cancers at a stage that meaningfully improves survival.