For interventions with a number needed to treat of 80-100, potential harm from side effects must be carefully weighed against limited benefit.
⚠ High risk
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.
◐PARTIALLYSUPPORTED
⚠
High-risk intervention — consult a physician before acting.Drug-drug interactions, dose-dependence, and screening contraindications apply.
“And when you're looking at these studies that have, you know, number needed to treat around 80 or 100, right? So only one out of every p 80 patients is going to benefit from taking that medication and there's some potential harm you know”
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
M
Share your read of this claim…
Posting publicly as you · linked to your social profiles
Sort by:
AV
A. Volkovreader
4h
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
NP
N. Park
2d
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
View content
74
Skeptics
0
No creators in this column.
For interventions with a number needed to treat of 80-100, potential harm from side effects must be carefully weighed against limited benefit. — Whalespan