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.
well we we didn't know the at time we we we didn't know what the fraction of resistant population was at the beginning so that was probably the biggest thing so if it's one percent it's you know that takes longer than if it's if it's uh let's say 20 or 30 percent um and there are some other things like the the uh we didn't we weren't really entirely sure what the proliferation rate was and again i mean things like birth and death we didn't we just estimated those
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.
at each cycle you would you would have this plateau so stepwise it would just keep going up and at some point you would lose control inevitably and all of our models said that if we did this somewhere between two and twenty cycles the three would fail