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.
it creates a situation of what I would call cognitive dissonance where people just don't understand that they're in trouble and there may be a delay in between when they when they had to plug in their catheter or some other an interruption of insulin infusion and when they actually end up recognizing it
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.
if the glucose lowering agent is essentially dragging all that glucose out into your urine essentially what what it does is it's dragging away glucose which is the primary biomarker of life threatening insulin deficiency elevated blood glucose is the primary biomarker of life threatening innocence efficiency of people who live a type-1