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 um there's lots of things that are sensitive meaning that there are proteins that accumulate um biochemistries metabolites that go up in cancer um but the problem is they go up in a lot of benign conditions right so you know a big benign prostate spews out a lot of PSA um uh and pretty much every other protein or metabolite does that and so what you know the biomarkers to date were all very sensitive but all had false positive rates of you know say five or 10%
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.