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.
it's very difficult to truly track a thorough sporadic plaque in vivo it's it's it's real challenged so I'll just say markers have improved you know CIT is obviously one that I've shown myself but I don't really know how much of that is true plaque and I'm doubtful that it's like even the majority there's the ankle brachial minimus stated but in compared to that right I've seen that one improve
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.