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.
So, in other words, it is a lot more complex story than just talking about a cell replacing a cell. It is also thinking about the cell population that talks to other guys and generates chemicals, growth factors, and cytokines, and whatever you wanna call them. And these chemicals help tissue to regenerate.
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.
It is also the cell that can do things that the other cells need, right? And so... Right. And so, in other words, yes, I mean, they try to. But, you know, obviously, as you mentioned, I mean, the epigenetic reprogramming that happens over time makes them, "Yeah. Maybe we're a little bit not able to make those growth factors anymore. What do you want?"