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.
it turns out that if you bring people into the eye doctor four times a year everybody gets better you know their compliance with artificial tears gets better and were they using artificial tears they were they were able to use whatever they would normally use to treat their dry eye so i i guess like in the same way that if you go to the dentist four times a year all of a sudden your flossing before you go to the dentist both arms of the study got better
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.