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.
because they've looked at populations of 300,000 doing this and they might have like just a few people getting them which is far literally like 90 95 percent less the normal incidence of DVT so it's lower than the regular population much lower
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.
but this actually we believe decreases your risk of DVT because I mean they've looked at populations of 300,000 doing this and they might have like just a few people getting them which is far literally like 90 95 percent less the normal incidence of DVT so it's lower than the regular population much lower so it doesn't appear to cause any problems when done properly