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.
so if a compound succeeds in phase two which means it continues to show no significant adverse safety effects which by the way doesn't mean it doesn't have side effects right every treatment has side effects it's just that it doesn't have um side effects that are deemed unacceptable for the risk profile of the patient and it shows efficacy so really you have to have these two things
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 if the if the drug gets through phase one safely then it goes to phase two and the goal of phase two is to continue to evaluate for safety but also to start to look for efficacy
if a compound succeeds in phase two which means it continues to show no significant adverse safety effects which by the way doesn't mean it doesn't have side effects right every treatment has side effects it's just that it doesn't have um side effects that are deemed unacceptable for the risk profile of the patient and it shows efficacy