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.
you and I can go on an MRI scan and both of our hips are incredibly likely 90% likely to have label tearing on em are and you put a 20 year old in there and it's not 90% but it's about 80% so the odds are it's very high so you're gonna see some sort of label abnormality on an MRI on nearly everybody put in
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.
the problem is that most of us walking around have especially for at my age have plenty of positive findings but there are some automatic I mean I've never had a spine or originated you know symptom and so that's your it's a very double-edged sword to get those MRIs same thing in the labrum
the problem is that most of us walking around have especially for my age um uh have plenty of positive findings but they're asymptomatic I mean I've never had a spine or originated um you know symptom and so that's you're it's a very double-edged sword to get those MRIs same thing in the laum the laum will naturally degenerate just by using it