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.
and the next thing they did was statins had failed to reduce current events and people with chronic renal failure statins didn't work so let's give him a statin plus ezetimibe so you had the Sharpe trial renal they had pretty bad GF ours so everybody two groups got a statin but the one group got a statin in his that amide and the statins out of my group reduced events wasn't so there were but at statin ezetimibe works yep
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.