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.
so ascvd is a disease that has both a genetic component and an environmental component but it really doesn't have much of a component of luck as far as we can tell so you know stochastic processes involving mutations uh doesn't seem to play a role right there's there's just pure causality from the standpoint of environmental triggers and from genetic inheritance
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.