Direct evidence is thin. The claim is plausible and aligns with adjacent findings, but there isn't yet a body of high-quality work that would let us call it well-supported on its own terms.
while we have clinical trials we don't have Decades of research letting us know what the long-term implications of some of these things are either and you're not going to this is why pharmaceutical companies have things like postmarketing surveillance where after they release a drug they're like oh is there other stuff that we didn't know about from our for our shorter term trials that will play out in decades time frame
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.