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.
if you go to the lowest end of that calculator which I think is 40 or 45 there's almost no variable you can put in there that gets you to a high enough 10-year risk that you would trigger treatment five percent ten year risk okay now we need to act conversely at a high enough age there's almost no variable you can put in there for which the risk is low enough in other words age is the biggest driver of 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.