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.
Now, that said, even as these medications exist now, as you know, there's an impulse to use them in very small doses and to use them as adjunctive treatments for the therapy of various kinds. And I'm also supportive of that if done carefully and rigorously, of course there's risk, but there's risk with many other kinds of treatments. And I'm not sure that the risks for these medications vastly outweigh the risks that we normally tolerate in other branches of medicine.
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.
even as these medications exist now, as you know, there's an impulse to use them in very small doses and to use them as adjunctive treatments for therapy of various kinds, and I'm also supportive of that, if done carefully and rigorously.