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.
but the problem with with niacin trials and ctp trials is that they weren't done particularly in in patients with high lpas so they're probably underpowered at least when it comes to trying to understand that yeah because you would have to recruit only patients that have high lpa which would mean to get rid of 80 of the trial population so so these trials will be will be very hard to do
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.
niacin reduces the production of uh of lpa uh but uh and an lpa still predicts the risk of events in patients treated with niacin so we know that from the from the aim high trial