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.
they carry out this trial it's intended to be a 10-year clinical trial and they it's fourteen hundred and forty one patients they're relatively recent onset type one diabetes they're largely late teen and adults and it's a very difficult trial to do because there were no established best practices to achieve near normal blood glucoses at the time
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.
what they did was they mandated conference calls and on the conference calls they shared best practices they crowd-sourced it if you will and so they didn't have any idea how they were going to achieve their goals but they ended up ultimately learning how to do it