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.
as it is with many clinical trials when you're first inh human you don't know right it is first inum often times they're non-human primates in terms of trying to figure out as much as you can but it's still not a person and each person is unique and so as you're doing it um it is a tricky situation in terms of getting it right when you do the first person you learn and you figure out from there whether you're going to go higher or lower
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.