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.
the other interesting finding when you look at the papers on Med archive from the Chinese experience there's a lot of what they're calling a cute heart injury and it's not really clear what's going on there whether that's a viral myocarditis or whether it potentially whether they're just having myocardial infarcts because of the a RDS and shock but you're seeing a lot of heart injury
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.