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.
One example that I remember, and Gordon will have to forgive me if I'm misquoting this, is they had a patient who had a stroke and had weakness and ankle flection. That is, excuse me, ankle extension, to extend the ankle. And so, they had the patient in a seat where they can measure ankle extension, and then they measured it and then they exposed the patient to episodic hypoxia and they measured again, the strength of the ankle extension went way up.
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.