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.
the technology is CT angiography and what they're doing is they're doing a scan of the soft and calcified plaque in the arteries and it's of extremely high resolution it has a has a spatial resolution of I believe it can see plaque down to 1 mm or even smaller in some cases
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 technology is CT and geography and what they're doing is they're doing a scan of the soft and calcified plaque in the arteries and it's of extremely high resolution it has a has a spatial resolution of I believe it can see plaques down to 1 millimeter or even smaller in some cases