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.
if the surgeon felt that on visual inspection at least or maybe even sampling nodes that any of those nodes had cancer it was her opinion that this is really futile because now we know it's already escaped the lung it doesn't matter
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.
we're going to take this tumor out we're going to take out your right upper lobe unless of course we've seen that there's disease in the mediastinum but there was no disease on the pet scan in the mediastinum so she was feeling pretty positive about being able to take that out