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.
there was a there was a paper that came out in 2001 or 2002 in the England Journal of Medicine that really changed the face of how glucose and insulin levels were managed or glucose levels were managed using intensive insulin therapy in the ICU that has been questioned obviously then we had subsequent trials that have suggested that you know maybe the benefit on the glucose I'd come at the cost with an insulin side etc
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.
intensive insulin therapy of course has had its ups and downs resurgence in the literature but basically there was a there was a paper that came out in 2001 or 2002 in the England Journal of Medicine that really changed the face of how glucose and insulin levels were managed or glucose levels were managed using intensive insulin therapy in the ICU that has been questioned obviously then we had subsequent trials that have suggested that you know maybe the benefit on the glucose I'd come at the cost with an insulin side etc