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.
we are getting a hundred of these folks that meet our eligibility criteria which are about borderline lean mass hyperresponders from what I was mentioning before and scanning them at Day Zero and then scanning again about 365 days later
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.
well we are getting a hundred of these folks that meet our eligibility criteria which are about borderline lean mass hyper-responders from what I was mentioning before and scanning them at Day Zero and then scanning them again about 365 days later so it's about a year apart