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.
These are patients who bounce from doctor to doctor and their symptoms are dismissed. They're being told that their painful period is normal, that their painful sex is in their head, that they're exaggerating their pain, and meanwhile their ovarian reserve is completely depleting, and no one is addressing 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.