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.
we have a paper in the nature medicine Lancet and we are submitting our Rose to which is our fixed dose combination with acetamide to another very good Journal and so you look at the tables there are no side effects we have not identified a single side effect related to study drug until now now of course that will change because in phase three the numbers are bigger but in Phase One and phase two we have seven phase one studies and four phase two studies there's nothing
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.