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.
And the only reason I honestly see is if a woman has an active cancer that you are going to target hormones as a target for your treatment of cancer. That's not to say the hormones cause the cancer, but we have a target sometimes because all body parts have hormone receptors and we have used hormones as a target for our breast cancer therapies and some other cancer therapies.
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.