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 gonna take a while to do the technical trials but I want to stay very optimistic for the people listening because we are talking about less than 10 years I would say if we if these are targets are successful which they already are in edible modes we're going to have some sort of intervention to fix the blood vessels in the next few years
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.
there's a lot of a lot node but several targets that are very promising currently tested in both animals and clinical trials to try to protect these vessels because it's not only a question of leakage but if the vessels are not functional there's not an enough blood flow throughout the whole brain