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 does look like these are chemical burns within the lungs but then the lungs seem to be not regenerating themselves but the wounds are getting worse so does it behave like a RDS that's what it sounds like it's a lot of you know shell recruitment and then oxygenation you know doesn't occur but they're not 100% sure
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.
so it looks like an acute respiratory distress syndrome so almost looks like a chemical burn to a lung where people have a respiratory failure that requires a huge amount of support in the intensive care unit including intubation and ventilation and another support measures