(Yes, yes, nothing in science is iron clad but the last part refers to a point where the evidence is so overwhelming that turning it around would require unprecedented scientific breakthroughs and proof that state-of-the-art biomedical research methods are fundamentally wrong)
-
-
Show this thread
-
All this time, competition between scientists has been fierce creating incentives for better ideas. New hypotheses have been tested and novel methodologies developed. At each incremental step, new approach could have disproven previous data but it hasn’t - quite the opposite.
Show this thread -
It’s like
@neiltyson has said (paraphrasing), scientists never agree unless they absolutely have to. Every team thinks there’s something wrong with the rival team’s work. So when multiple groups around the world look at the same data and agree, it’s not a small thing.Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What’s your LDL?
-
It hovers around 2mmol/l. I have pretty bad genetics
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
but malcolm kendrick but aseem malhotra but uffe ravnskov but ivor cummins do the names of these luminaries mean NOTHING to you?
-
Are PCSK inhibitors equally effective? I have some side effects to statins (like muscle twitching ) , my doctor says we should switch to PCSKs for you.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Pull the other one Pauli - even the world's top Risk Calculators from the nerdy actuaries and other experts....spurn LDL - and rightly so. What a farce....you're embarrassing yerself
pic.twitter.com/vitwzCztcb
-
They don’t evaluate lifetime risk. They’re also focused on plaque ruptures and other endpoints; not the gradual build-up of disease.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Minnesota Minnesota Minnesota. History is simply not on your side, Paul.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.