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.
everything we're doing is according to a uh experimental clinical practice guideline it's not just like we're randomly trying stuff it's you know we do a systematic review of the literature write a clinical practice guideline get a peer-reviewed to Gold Standard guideline criteria like agree to and um then decide how to clinically act based on that
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.