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 now the person comes in and again we've just said 50 of those people are not going to respond and that's pretty sad so what are we saying to those 50 of people it's we we we're going to go back to trying more and more conventional therapies or do we say we should try this again and maybe the second time we use a higher dose or 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.