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.
the definitive proof of that was in a New England Journal article that was done by my friend the late mark Pesce vets and he used in a huge clinical trial rituximab which alters b-cell function alters the ability of the B cells to make antibodies and they were able to delay the course of type 1 diabetes so they were able to intervene in a subset of patients that were progressing slowly enough they presented with positive GAD antibodies but they still had beta cell production
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.