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.
women um but they're still at risk and they're less likely to be treated you know when you look at the data from like the Yum Mi young Cardinal infarction cohort before the onset of their myocardial infarction you know women were less likely to have been treated and perceived to be at lower risk
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 so 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
women um but they're still at risk and they're less likely to be treated you know when you look at the data from like the Yum am I young myocardial infarction cohort before the onset of their myocardial infarction you know women were less likely to have been treated and perceived to be at lower risk