Peter Attia· MD
They weren't durable. They were transient. They lasted for months at best, weeks in some cases.
Loading…
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.
They weren't durable. They were transient. They lasted for months at best, weeks in some cases.
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.
So the New England Journal of Medicine publishes the back-to-back papers in 2001 now of the phase one clinical trial describing these heroic and quite reliably observed responses to single agent abel kinase inhibition with a non-perfect abel kinase inhibitor in the form of imatinib.