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.
I think the discussion gets a little bit heated at one point when I take issue with something Tom said about suggesting that biopsies could exacerbate cancer I I really don't want anybody to come out of this believing that having a biopsy is going to increase their risk of metastatic cancer I think that anyone's entitled to a hypothesis but to my knowledge there are absolutely no evidence to support that claim
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.