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.
we might still consider to use teardrop shaped implant because I think in a reconstructive patient they're one of the few situations where there still is some benefit and that's actually the only situation where I'm using the teardrop shaped implants is for breast cancer reconstruction
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.
these teardrop shaped implants the reason they develop them is they said well the breast is not round the breast looks more like a teardrop so let's make an implant that matches the breast it'll be more natural