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 in reality I think what emerged after the fact was hey the guys at Merck sort of knew this earlier on there there was data that suggested there was something going on and instead they should have partitioned it and said hey maybe there's a subset of patients in whom we don't let this drug be taken because I think a lot of patients got deprived of an amazing drug on the basis of a few
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.