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.
what I didn't know at that time was that this other study called Miami heart was taking place elsewhere the principal investigator is Cam nir fantastic guy and I'm so thankful he started this thing because it's a much larger population I believe it's 2400 2500 something like that
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.
so basically since what the last I don't know we actually kind of got this rolling in February but there's a lot of process that's involved with it -- finally the match analysis was able to happen
but the catch is that -- 20 of those are outside of the age ranges of the Miami Heart cohort so that's still plenty that we had 80 so of those 80 lanquist statistician needs to try to see if there's a matched cohort can it get matched for age -- gender -- ethnicity all these things