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.
I figured well it's better to find this now because you can treat these things electively quite easily but once they rupture the mortality is incredibly high the mortality of a ruptured aneurysm is over 93 to 95 percent so most people don't make it
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.
the mortality of a ruptured aneurysm is over 93 to 95 percent
whereas when you do find them earlier all sorts of options such as quarreling where you can actually treat it or clipping and so that's actually one of the real powers of being able to kind of see what's going on without any injection or anything like that you can see the exquisite detail of the arteries and if there is a problem and we found a fair number of people with them you can actually save their lives