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.
there's only one major stat in trial carried out not by a pharmaceutical company that was called all hat llt it was done by the National Institutes of Health and it's on pravastatin and at the end of five years they found no benefit on any cardiovascular outcome and no benefit on mortality outcome
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.
in the case of statens the vast majority of Trials are sponsored by the industry as I mentioned Ronald Reagan 1980 Etc only one major non-industry funded study on statens has been done it is the all hat trial the anti-hypertensive and lipid lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial acronym all hat which showed pravastatin had no significant benefit in reducing either all cause mortality or coronary heart disease in primary prevention that is the only one that has not been sponsored by the industry