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.
so that's where if you like over many many years of my thinking has eventually come to it was called the thrombogenic hypothesis ronald ross in the 1970s called it feed the response to injury hypothesis and other people have called the other thing so you know this is not like new brand new thinking it's just trying to bring all the things together
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.