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.
CAC is probably the gold standard for understanding what's going on with cardiovascular risk C but the problem is it does it induces quite a bit of radiation whereas cimt doesn't it's just an ultrasound so it's like probably one tier below CAC uh without the the the old the uh the radiation 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.