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.
there's still this lingering notion that somehow heart disease is a man's disease the problem is women have historically been under enrolled in randomized clinical trials so we previously had limited data on efficacy and safety of Therapies in women
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.
clinicians even when given the same 10-year estimated risk or burden or risk factors clinicians are more likely to perceive women to being at lower risk and this leads to under treatment