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.
What I haven't seen that many times is what you're describing is that the CT angio is normal in a 50 year old so if someone tells me that they had in their teens or late teens or when they went into the military you know when they're 18 they had an elevated LDL cholesterol and when you then see them when they're 50 and they haven't been treated to have a normal calcium scoring and or a normal CT angio that is really rare for ldls let's say you know between two and three hundred
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.