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.
you don't have to go back to NPR I I believe it was 2017 when Joanne Manson published a paper saying just what you said first yes we went too far second we found that women who are nor moans had a lower risk of breast cancer lower death from breast cancer and in fact lower death from all causes compared to women who weren't taking hormones but she didn't endorse the use of hormones she fell back on the lowest dose for the shortest period of time
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.
For symptomatic perimenopausal women under 60, hormone replacement therapy reduces all-cause mortality.
The breast-cancer risk attributed to HRT in the original WHI trial was overstated and the timing window matters most.