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.
they have arthritis and it's quite a shocking development because you don't know you don't necessarily know and for folks just listening the plain x-ray is a good enough tool for that diagnosis because you'll see the absence or thinning of cartilage where you should see it
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 plain x-ray is a good enough tool for that diagnosis because you'll see the absence or thinning of cartilage where you should see it as in that diagram there correct