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 we have these nudges in medicine and they're kind of well known in every field look I'm probably guilty of them myself I would bet that if uh if I were if I were listening to me if I were outside of me and listening to me talk to patients I'm sure there are many times when subconsciously I'm doing the same thing I'm nudging them towards what I think is the right answer even if in cases when um maybe my confidence should only be 70% instead of 99%
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.