The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
So one of the things I'm speaking into is the gender gap that exists so I my feeling is that the research money that goes into women's health is abysmal compared to what goes into Men's Health really and I think that's changing but there's also a huge lack of awareness of sex and gender differences when it comes to the way that we construct clinical trials and other experiments
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.
No, I think it's objectively there's good data that the the funding for women's health research it's it's like 10%. It's like of the overall NIH budget for example, it's very small. If you look at reproductive health, it's even smaller. So, it's a huge issue.