Peter Attia· MD
So that mostly got rid of that problem that we used to call instant restenosis.
Loading…
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 that mostly got rid of that problem that we used to call instant restenosis.
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.
And what they realized was that you could paint the outside of a stent with this drug. And so it would basically be there locally and it wouldn't cause any systemic toxicity or any other problems. And it would just act on the cells that you wanted it to.