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.
this is where actually some huge advances have been made in terms of um blood-based detection um of those instances um we're not we're not perfectly good at that now but there have been substantial improvements in the technology for detecting particularly circulating tumor DNA um in instances where people have only microscopic medesthetic disease
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.