We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
my problem is not with the calcium score its width of a school of thought that says well a calcium score if it's zero means nothing matters you know you're sort of scot-free and that's you know unfortunately that's just categorically untrue and the data bear that out
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.
starting to treat waiting for coronary calcium is a bad idea
starting to treat waiting for a coronary calcium is a bad idea